This is not entirely true. There was no counter to my strategy of using as many 2 or 3 letter words to annoy my step mom when I was a teenager. I guess in a sense I didn’t win any games, but I was banned from ever playing with her again and that was a better victory to me.
Example: the Falcon Punch. It provides an insanely satisfying, powerful hit on the opponent provided the player can get a good read on them, or set up with good positioning and combos. But it's also really weak in that if it misses, the opponent gets a huge opening for a strong punish. It's satisfying to pull off, satisfying to punish, and fun to watch either way.
plus the fact that it fills a button okay hear me out here falcon already has some pretty great stuff. his up air is good because it can go into his forward air, he's got a solid back air, his down air is a meteor with a huge hitbox, and his f-air is STRONGURU KNEEU. his smash attacks are pretty garbage besides forward and even then it's basically a more practical falcon punch (im really tired when writing this so i can't even remember the last time i used his down smash), his up b is pretty good if you pretend spacies don't exist and his side b is pretty bad now all of those good aerials combined with his HOT TAMALI speed (we're including that yung lateral airspeed) means that putting something like a shine in his neutral b would be hell on fuckin earth for everyone involved, right so we have something fun but pretty much useful in somewhat competitive play instead its 3 am here okay
Assassin's Creed Multiplayer does this REALLY well. It's why I play that way more than any other online game. Someone may have a special ability, but instead of ruining balance for other players, it just means you have to try and find a way around it - and there usually is as there is such a good range of abilities that don't completely overpower others. Plus their usage is limited so even if you do have the most powerful ability, your use of it is restricted and you must rely on actual skill.
Thanks guys, definitely had an 'Aha!' moment here, even after the fifth time watching this. Was prototyping a card effect 'Inquisition' where, when you destroy an opponents card, you choose one of their cards to discard. Now, I'm switching that to where the losing side has to choose which card they destroy. Now it's no longer a 'force of nature' per se, but a potentially difficult choice, and one that provides options for the one under that effect! :)
Now I know the exact word why TF2 is so much fun! For every Sniper, there is a Spy or Scout that can counter him. For every Soldier, there is a Pyro or Demoman that can counter him. For every Medic combo, there is another Medic combo that can counter it. It's an FPS that actually did Counter Play and Risk VS Reward right. Every weapon has a slight difference to it which forces you to react in a different way. Is the Soldier using a Direct Hit instead of the normal Rocket Launcher? Then he does less splash damage so be sure to dodge his rockets and move in on him before he can reload! Has the enemy team a bunch of Phlogging Pyros? Pick your own Pyro, grab the Degreaser and a Shotgun and you'll have the time of your life! Counter Play. A term to remember.
My thoughts exactly. The best matches I play in TF2 are always the ones in which my team sees the other team's composition and rearranges according to that composition. Also, the Pyro's airblast is a fantastic example of an actual mechanic that balances play and makes it interesting for everyone.
I wish more public server players could understand this more. You get intellegent players that play the classes that will benefit their team or counter the enemy, then players who just play sniper and scout no matter what. The classes of a team is what decides who wins for the most part, the skills of the player just makes it easier.
Honestly, that's not the best example of counterplay. What makes TF2's counterplay good is that even in an unfavorable matchup like Sniper vs. Spy, or Spy vs. Pyro, there's still room for outplays. You still have ways to come out on top if you're playing Sniper against Spy, or Spy against Pyro.
@@dragonslair951167 this channel needs to talk about generalists and specialists. The best classes in tf2 (the meta) is a demo, soldier, scout, and medic
Rainbox Six: Siege does an awesome job of this. For example, there is a bear trap that can be placed next to windows. Hop through the window, hit the bear trap, and you die. But, this gives you options 1) Use a valuable grenade to blow up the trap 2) As you hop through the window, shoot the trap. However, you are helpless for the brief second it takes to destroy the trap 3) Rappel upside down from above the window, shoot the trap, then enter. However, this wastes valuable time. 4) Enter somewhere else. Design like this makes R6: Siege a really fun game.
+Extra Credits Hey! the description is partially broken! "Grey Jenkins is a pretty skilled artist, in case you didnapos;t know." You know where the mistake is.
I am not a gamer. I would hardly call myself a casual gamer. But somehow this is really interesting to me. I am surrounded by people who play a lot of games and it's interesting to see how games work. I also like that this show shines a light on games as art. I've never thought of games as art. Great show. You guys are doing an amazing job ^^.
I have been playing A LOT of Battlefield 4 lately. This reminds me of the grenades in that game. For example, when they enemy throws a napalm grenade at you the fire makes a really cool effect. I get hurt, the enemy feels good because they do damage to an enemy. And I get a cool lightshow. :D
Well, the counter-play would be more about you being able to, say, avoid the enemy or fool him into wasting grenades. I guess that enjoying the visual effects of the grenade works, too. ^_^
It's weird how pictures can add to words. Daniel talked about fixing problems, accompanied by a picture of Fry and Leelah. My brain went "Fix it fix it fix it fix it fix it fix it fix it! ... Fix it fix it!"
tf2 pulls off counter play rather well. if you get headshoted too much you become a spy sneak behind and stab him. get back stabbed too may times? be a pyro. over powered turrets? demo man or spies are both good for getting rid of obscure turrets that turn even the heavy with the most health into giblets.
Switching classes to deal with something isn't an example of counter-play. That kind of rock-paper-scissor gameplay is frankly boring so let's all be thankful TF2 avoids it. Part of what makes TF2 great is learning and improving by sticking to a class and overcoming some difficulty. When a sniper learns how to watch for and deal with spies they can see themselves breaking through the mold of class-counters. That is counter-play, it means they have evolved as a player into something more than just a class with predefined strengths and weaknesses. Meanwhile the sniper that switches to pyro whenever he gets backstabbed will stay forever stuck in his mold.
***** I think both count as counterplay, on two basic levels, on the one hand, newer players can switch to hard class counters, given how easy class switching is, this is a valid form of counterplay. As the player grows in skill, the learn counters outside of the original hard class counters, giving them even more options to deal with the problem.
*****, also, it's a good idea for snipers in TF2, like snipers in real life, to have a designated spotter, someone to be more situationally aware of the sniper's immediate surroundings than the sniper. Medics work well for this because they can not only watch out for spies while the sniper shoots away, but they can also benefit from the sniper's kills by healing him while they act as his spotter. Another tactic I've seen is having a sentry and dispenser making up the sniper's nest while a pyro with one of the sapper smashing melee weapons be his spotter. Another tactic is to have the sniper and a heavy (with the Hu Long Heater) use the same dispenser and keep the sniper within the range of the ring of fire. Teamwork is important.
A ton of the counter play elements they said in World of tanks are also largely present in the Advanced Wars series because everyone has the potential to use all units in the game, making it all about reading into your opponents tactics. Probably one of my favorite strategy games ever.
Halo's sniper gameplay (in standard modes, on games 2, 3, Reach, and maybe CE) could actually be used as an example of excellent Counter Play, for the following reasons: 1. Each shot draws a line to the sniper's location. While the competent sniper will immediately move, this at least shows where they were, and therefore the probable areas they will move to. 2. De-scoping -- If the sniper takes fire, they de-scope, which makes it much more difficult to hit their targets. So, led by the tracer line, allies (or you, if you survived the first shot) have a good chance to counter the sniper with common mid-range weapons. 3. It's a power weapon, and therefore only spawns occasionally, and with a limited amount of ammo. Even if the sniper is not directly countered, they will eventually run out of ammo and need to go back to the sniper rifle spawnpoint, which is usually in a location ill-suited for sniping (close quarters), where opposing players have a chance to prevent the re-supply. All that aside, active camouflage, good map design, other power weapons, and vehicles all offer ample opportunity for creative ways to counter snipers. They simply require you to think instead of panicking. Of course, none of this makes up for incompetence in basic gameplay, and a good sniper will be able to dominate inexperienced players, but that's true in any skill-based game -- especially real-time ones. Among reasonably well-matched players, the sniper gameplay is extraordinarily well-balanced and can be satisfying for both parties. Vehicles in Halo also have excellent Counter Play, hijacking/boarding being among the most satisfying FPS mechanics I have encountered . . . along with plasma grenades, plasma pistols, and other power weapons. It's fun to go on a vehicle spree, and it's fun to blow up or take over opposing vehicles.
Srebrnic1 XD Ah, is that what this is about? I am already cured; I own no consoles, and prefer PC versions of Halo, where they exist. Alas that mostly they don't!
For great conceptualizing of counter play, I would suggest David Sirlin's Playing to win. A great look into the depth of what fighting game is at the heart of it's game play: Counter Strategies and Meta Game (meaningful choices that have a 51% or greater chance of being the best in this situation among all choices in this situation)
Kill streaks in cod have the worst counter play ever. You cannot stop these stupid heat seeking missiles that take no skill to use and you just die over and over when it's not even your fault. One of the many reasons cod multiplayer sucks
+Battle Ox I know what you mean. although there might be one or two perks for getting around killstreaks, they don't work all the Time, and they do not make the Game more intresting. They just narrow down your options.
***** I disagree. At least in black ops 2, ive created various loadouts to counter killstreaks. Ghost + Rocket launcher with lock on + black hat + that perk that makes you inmune to AI controled ones. Using this ive turnes the tables in more than one match. They simply couldnt keep launching killstreaks because i was destroing them. And on the mean time i was dying either getting shot were black hatting (i dont think thats a word) or locking on the target. That isnt the best counterplay, i give you that, but it works.
A Derp ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡ °) Yeah, It works. somehow. but it doesn't fel very good, soming to the pouint where some perks are the best osr whatnot. I haven't played BO2 much. But wouldn't the players still be able to hit you with things like the hellfire missile? you just need to stand amongst teammates, or have someone who doesn't initially see other people because they are out of his field of view, so he has the time to recognize you even though you are not marked. or do you disappear completely in the eyes of Killstreaks in BO2? I know, that people still can see you in MW3 with their killstreaks. you just go unmarked.
True, but thats when counter play comes in. any class that can ket kills without relying too much on their abilities would kill Sombra. Zarya, Solider 76, mcree. Every hero has a counter.
I really liked this episode! I think not only the content was verry interesting, but also the art made it really fun to watch. i´d liketo see the artist again in future videos!
+Moacir Rodrigues actually there is: when the laners are in a lane. it describes a time frame, not a situation, and in lane phase rengar has weak ganks because clears very badly and ha snot very strong ganks, he has to snowball. Also, while Fizz has counterplay, Rengar not so much and counterplay against him relies on prevention; aniway, in Rengar case many devs do not feel him alright so they plan to take measures in some way. Plus, even thought there are edge cases that needs some assestment, Riot stance is actually to have counterplay and skill fun for the enemy and that can be seen in most of the updated champions.
This isnt counterplay. This is weakness. The counterplay for Zed -> Buying Zhonyas or QSS. You can change your playstyle to counter the enemy playstyle.
Errrrrrmmaaaaaaaagerrrrrd, that ending song! As it was fading in, my mind was hilariously racing for what song that was!!! It's so faint, but man, that's facing Worlds, just heavily (but exceptionally) remixed. Wow. So many memories...
One shooter that does this well is Blacklight Retribution, what with its extremely complementing weapon system that allows players to, if playing together, really try and build a cohesive team capable of dealing with differing threats at various ranges.
Counter point: Overwatch is now a game where you pick your characters based solely on countering the top frag of the enemy team. Oh they have a mercy? Im on reaper/pharrah. Oh theres a lucio doing well? Ill counter him with X. I feel like counter play can be good, and make a game more interesting. But I personally want my multiplayer games to be an open environment with even classes, not a rock paper scissors match with better graphics.
A good example of bad counterplay is, ironically, counterspells in Magic: The Gathering. This concept's existed over there for a while, though they call it interactivity. When playing against a deck with a lot of counters, you end up just... not being able to do anything unless your opponent says okay. That's not fun, engaging, or likely to do good things for your blood pressure. It's not even skill-intensive for the guy playing it, you just don't let your opponent do anything. Compare that to Giant Growth. I will go on record as saying that Giant Growth is the best card in the game, in the sense that it makes playing it more engaging. Being able to, at any time, temporarily make one of your creatures bigger is enormous. The very *existence* of such an ability makes combat decisions more interesting even in games where it's never played.
Actually, counterspells can give some good counter-play because then the game becomes about feignts. if you can get something through that doesn't seem too dangerous but can then use effectively without other vulnerable spells, or sucker the opponent into wasting their last counter or tapping out for something that you don't actually need, you can get the upper hand in a very clever and satisfying manner.
That's true... if you only have one or two in your deck. They're fine in limited. But in Constructed, it's too easy to load up on them and just say no to everything, and not have to decide whether this is worth blowing a valuable counterspell on.
Yes, a deck based on Countering and stalling, even hate bears, can be incredibly frustrating to play against. Hell, the best Magic deck I've personally seen was nothing but counter spells and man-lands. However, there are always, always ways around that. Having a swarm of weak, cheat creatures you can pump out and, as you said, Giant Growth. Or hell, countering their counter spells.
For anyone interested, Tom Caldwell did a talk at GDC 2013, like this video mentions he was hoping to, where he elaborates on the concept in more depth in how Riot used it. It's even on youtube now: it's called "Riot's Counterplay and Teamplay in Multiplayer Game Design"
Talking about my experience in MW 1&2 I used to switch to a build specificly designed to shoot down enemy killstreak rewards, even the scouting drones with a rocket launcher or sometimes even with my gun when I realized I'm in the inferior team. That ended up winning me many matches, because once my teams killstreak rewards started kicking in my team had a big advantage over the enemy.
I think XCOM: Enemy Unknown is the best example of counter play. Mainly, it has to do with how they divide classes: Heavy, Assault, Sniper, and Support. We've seen in other games (TF2) that there are more ways to divide up the skill sets, but this palette of characters stands a good representation for strategic gameplay. Heavy is the simplest and strongest right off the bat. They aren't overly mobile or accurate with their main weapon, but have a high ceiling in terms of damage. The rocket is a reliable means of clearing an area and dealing lots of damage at a time. A majority of the time, the upgrades have to do with getting more ammo and chances to shoot, so even an elite Heavy is still very introductory in terms of strategy. The depth comes from the high amounts of explosives, which can alter the map quickly if used properly (aka. blowing cover and creating entryways). The Assault is a high-risk, high-reward approach. They have average mobility and typically utilize a high-damage, but short-range weapon. This means that they force the opponent to respond to their presence, but if they are left in a bad spot, there's not much helping them. With upgrades, they become super useful in flushing out enemies or rushing one strong target. It takes a little bit to adjust to the features available, but is still an accessible way to play. Sniper has the highest accuracy and damage rate, but requires a lot of patience and strategy. Starting out, Snipers are not all that useful; they rely on upgrades to increase their depth. Once that threshold is crossed, however, they make a great fallback option, though they still rely on strategy, mainly positioning and timing. The Support is the least offensive and most strategic. They are extremely mobile and can heal or provide cover for everyone. They are typically stuck with basic weapons, so they can hold their own but won't be the biggest contributors in terms of damage. Basically, it works like Rock-Paper-Scissors + a Wild Card. Heavy beats Sniper, Assault beats Heavy, and Sniper beats Assault. Obviously, there are exceptions to this when you have someone who is simply that good at the game, or if there is a big enough difference in ranks. Heavy beats Sniper because they can do lots of damage very quickly while simultaneously knocking out cover. The rocket is the only weapon that rivals the Sniper's range, and since Snipers don't typically boast a lot of health, this is a huge factor. Heavies have the advantage of being juggernauts of health, so Sniping them takes time. Moreover, Snipers require a clear line of sight to their target, something that the Heavy can just make themselves. Assault beats Heavy because they too boast a lot of health, but have a clear advantage in mobility. If you're able to successfully rush a Heavy, they can't really go anywhere that the Assault can't follow. Also, until you get into the very high ranks, the Assault has a much high fire rate. Sniper beats Assault because Assault lacks the fire range and explosive arsenal that the Heavy gets. Getting close to a target usually also includes getting in a line of sight, and unless you can reach a Sniper unnoticed (which is nearly impossible due to the layout of the game), they are most likely going to get a few shots in before you can touch them. The support can cancel out certain deficiencies depending on how you upgrade them. They can replenish a little health and provide some small boosts in cover no matter what, but the choice is yours to go one way or the other, or walk the line in-between. There are a lot of options here, and that makes this the Wild Card. The added difficulty comes in that you also have to keep an eye on their health and cover as well as the person they are supporting. There are definitive pros and cons to any approach you take in playing the game, be it against Aliens or other players.
Mozata Pumishmumi But then you've got the MEC Troopers in the expansion, who deal more damage than the Snipers, have more health than the Heavies, and (with certain upgrades) are faster than the Supports, with more options to blow away cover. I guess it is slightly mitigated by the fact that they cannot enter cover, thus making them a massive target for anyone who can see them, and the fact that their huge cost means you'll probably only be able to build and upgrade one MEC Trooper in your whole playthrough.
+Mozata Pumishmumi With the Sniper, picking the squad sight skill is an insanely obvious no-brainer that happens for almost every sniper ever. The alternative is the snap shot ability, which allows you to move and shoot in the same turn, but when you're sacrificing almost infinite range for it, AND getting an additional accuracy penalty on top of the penalties you already incur for being anything less than your maximum range, it hurts FAR more often than it can help. If you had squad sight as the starting skill, not only would snipers be useful from the moment they gain their class, but they'd have more variety in how they're played. You could either have that really hard hitting head shot sniper, or slightly less power, but with a bit of mobility. Enemy Within reduced the accuracy penalty for snap shot, but it still compares failtastically against squad sight. If they made squad sight increase the range where the accuracy penalty kicks in so you can't effectively shoot enemies you can see without squad sight, that would potentially balance it without giving every sniper the skill by default, but there are a lot of players who already hate seeing their snipers missing close-range shots because of the way range penalties are applied to the weapon.
ya awesome video keep them coming, there just something so special about learning the games from the inside and what designer have to think to give a great game
Team Fortress 2 uses Counter Play SO RIGHT, its amazing. Its balanced. Spys can get one hit kills, but their defenses are horrible. Heavies can give a lot of damage, but are desperately slow.
Heavies' miniguns got nerfed because even though being slow, they could just position properly to avoid fire, becoming a super-tanky pick-off class. Also the Huo-Long heatmaker made it much harder to get them while escorting carts and reduce their vulnerability to Spies, since they will be lit up on fire and unable to escape invisible. To sum it up, i love ValVe's dynamic balance system. In one update you can find something top strat and the next one just blows it apart adding an obvious counter or just a brake, meanwhile others change. That makes the meta change and force strat changes.
It' is counter play when you consider it's a team based game. I've seen team members play the same class over and over again in the same round just because its a standard strategy. Set the Engi here, send 3 spies, etc, you can always counter a good team by being creative enough.
lightingbolt85 TF2 has good counter play with the Sniper Rifle. When the Sniper is scoped for a headshot, a dot of their team color appears on the map where they are aiming. Even the Machina will leave a tracer round after the Sniper fires letting people know where he fired from.
Uh, I know there's discussions going on and all, but I really just want to express my excitement over the excellent CTF-Face remix at the end of this video.
I really don't get Riot on this one.. They have people like Tom Cadwell at their hands and still regularly introduce mechanics that are unbelievably counter intuitive to this design concept. It's not about how "OP" for example a Teemo shroom is (This tearm is absurdly overused anyways). It's about how it's shredding the gaming experience of everyone on the enemy team.
they've only been using these principles for some time now, most of the older abilities were more inspired by dota, just compare the release champions to the last 10 and you'll see the difference
Nimos Nimoos Sorry to say that... but one of the prime examples for a Champion that is completely counter intuitive to this concept is the rather new champ Yasuo. The Windwall for example reduces "the number of meaningful choices" that are available by a myriad.
ZodiakTeeVee Only it doesn't. It simply changes the choices. Do you wait for the wall to dissipate? Do you go through it into close quarters? Off to the side in order to shoot around it? And the right choice for those changes yet again depending on what champ you're playing. There is plenty of counterplay to it. And hell even Teemo shrooms have counterplay, albeit at a smaller level which makes sense as he is one of the original champions. Most of them have very little counterplay. Hence why no new champions have abilities like Taric's Point and Click stun.
Josiah Fincham It does. Especially in higher levels of play stuff like the Windwall doesn't only change the way you play but effectivly reduces the number of possibilities you have. It's sheer existence give's you way less options to aproach a teamfight and doesn't add any significant new options. It's true that this doesn't apply to most of the new champions since Riot has kinda learned it's "lesson". A new champ won't have that 700 range targetet poke (with an 0.9 ap scaling) that Zilean has.. but still. Old Champs exist and many of them are still a viable option even in competetive play.
ZodiakTeeVee I don't think you understand what I was saying at all. For one I don't recall saying anything about champion viability as this was a post on counterplay. Secondly you don't seem to grasp that windwall CHANGES your options as opposed to giving you no options. Hence there being counterplay which I already described in my previous comment. For instance when Taric or Sion or WW use their stuns or suppresses on you, there is no counterplay. There is no way to dodge the stuns. The only vague form of counterplay is to use Cleanse or an item that performs the same effect. However with windwall instead of removing all your options it changes them. Thus making you have to think of a better way to engage when he uses it. Even it's long cooldown is an example of counterplay as you have the option to try to bait it out, then go all in while it is cooling down.
HAHAH! Yes another positive on WOT! Thank you guys for bringing this stuff up! WOT, and now World of Warships as well, are BRILLIANT designs! So much so that I have lost count on the money I have spent on these games! Right now, World of Warships basically has 100% of my gaming attention! There is just SO MUCH fun in playing small, nearly undetectable destroyers with DEVASTATING torpedoes and just BLOWING a full health capitol Battleship right out of the water with one well aimed torpedo drop! And there is also ENDLESS fun in playing Cruisers of all types, NUKING destroyers and flooding battleships with deck fires as well as the occaisional torpedo if you are a fan of the Japanese Cruisers like me, or to a lesser extent the German ones as well! And then there is also ENDLESS fun in playing a Battleship, a TITAN so heavily armored and armed that it negates all but the strongest of enemy Battleship Armor Piercing ammunition, and again is a FULL COUNTER to a Cruiser player, one well placed salvo of shells, on a cruiser who has slipped up and shown too much of their side to a Battleship - and INSTANT GAME OVER! I do not play Carriers, but they are a good design too, they are best against Battleships and other Carriers, decent against Cruisers and all but hopeless against Destroyers! Anyway both World of Tanks and now World of Warships are VERY well balanced, perfect counter mechanic examples! And that combined with a constant progression through new tech trees of every class of vehicle (I do NOT play Artillery in World of Tanks, also Artillery is the most broken part of WOT, I love WOT, but sometime Artillery just ruins your days. It needs some additional balancing so that one handed monkeys cannot get lucky one-shots all day) - as well as constantly releasing new "Premium" vehicles which are well balanced with unique play styles, such as my 2 most recent purchases in World of Warships, the light cruiser USS Atlanta, and the Polish Destroyer ORP Blyskawica. Both ships offer quite unique styles of play, that would take a WALL of text to explain, but they are INCREDIBLY FUN! So you have constantly progressing game play, by the tech trees, then you have Captain skills which can make a HUGE difference, so it REALLY pays to work up one captain using multiple premium ships of the same nation which said captain can sail with no penalty to skills, and build said captain up a certain way so that combined with your preferred play style, you can be INCREDIBLY strong and effective! Then you have compelling PREMIUM ships that are not just fun and rewarding to play, but also will train up captains AND earn you a TON of "credits" - the in-game currency, and all this leads to a SENSE OF OWNERSHIP! And that is ONE mechanic that should NEVER be overlooked! In one of "The Game Theorists" episodes on DOTA 2 Vs LoL I argued for LoL because unlike Dota 2, LoL with its EARNED AND BOUGHT champions, as well as summoner level, runes and skills all lead to a VERY REAL SENSE OF OWNERSHIP! A mechanic I found to be TOTALLY LACKING in DOTA 2 with every single champion available immediately and permanently - as well as less PLAYER customization, such as the rune system, summoner level, and skill trees in LoL, DOTA 2 never got me! I spent over 2 years addicted to LoL before I started my now FOUR year journey with World of Tanks! I STILL LOVE THE GAME! And while it is NOT PERFECT, it is pretty damned close IMHO! And World of Warships is even BETTER! Again, IMHO! But yeah, Counter mechanics, and a SENSE OF OWNERSHIP of Digital material, that FEELS Tangible - that will STEAL my Money all day long! Even my Brother, who actually has ADD, and it shows in the sheer AMOUNT of games he buys and plays, was addicted to LoL and WOT for almost a SOLID YEAR (Which for him is, literally, a record!) and once World of Warships came out, he was addicted for 3 months straight - and is likely to come back to it soon, as he has already put probably 120 hours into Fallout 4 since he bought it release day. TL:DR Perhaps if you have not yet done it, try an episode focused on the whole "Tangible sense of ownership" mechanic, as THAT keeps me paying and playing - along with fundamentally good core gameplay and progression!
I love how whenever League of Legends is brought up in a positive light, there's always a small crowd that jumps in and says "Nah, you guys are all wrong, LoL is a terrible game." and yet never really provides solid evidence of their claim.
This is also prevalent in table tob games as well. In heroclix there is a power called hyper sonic speed and it allows the character using it to ignore all characters in the and make a movement attack and move against. As a player being attacked with it there is almost no ways of defending against other than having a high range or amazing movement. The really only defense is hoping for a crit miss or player error.
Way too many pictures of PILES of adorable kittens. I can't handle that much cuteness! Someone get me my emergency insulin! And more kitten pictures....
Magic the Gathering does this really well on a pretty regular basis. Just look at 3 recent cards: Voice of Resurgance, Chandra's Phoenix and Anger of the Gods. Voice and Phoenix both don't just die for good, but instead leave their controller with an option to "revive" them or another creature on the board (which can be really powerful). Anger of the Gods circumvents this by not killing, but exiling those creatures, meaning they won't come back/leave anything behind. Yet, Anger of the Gods is itself weak against stronger creatures, indestructable creatures, creatures with protection from red etc. so the cycle continues - brillant design !
+rotom9199 even TF2 has things that often can simply drive you insane and you might dont find a good way of counterplay. There are some few, but dont give you the feeling that it is enough. The old backburner or the old dead ringer. Thankyfully valve seems to be very carefull about these things, so the games is not stuck with this lack of counterplay.
Really interesting concept! I can finally put a specific term on "balanced" game play mechanics. My main example is Splatoon--I've found that every weapon is carefully calibrated to be amazing in the right hands with the correct strategy. For example, Rollers are powerful but require stealth to use their 1hKO, and the more powerful the ink fling, the longer it takes to throw it. Or to fit with the video, Chargers have the "laser pointer" which both aids in aiming and makes it so they're not OP because they can't just snipe you out of the blue, unless of course they're really good and know how to hide the reticle properly. It's definitely why it's my favorite game: even when you get owned, you know that there's a way to beat them, no matter what your weapon is.
I'd say the top mechanic Overwatch has that does this well is letting you change heroes without penalty as often as needed to continue evolving the counterplay throughout a match. Not a lot of people take advantage of this, but I've found that if I die over and over with one hero, it's time to try a new angle of attack. Maybe I need to bulk up with D.Va, or our support is lacking, or maybe Widowmaker to take out enemies that are just destroying up close. The other stuff is how each hero is designed carefully so that no one hero is explicitly better than others. In a match of Widowmaker vs Soldier 76, Widow has the advantage, but D.Va using her skills can charge Widow and take her out up close or even just a Reinhardt can stop a Widowmaker from being effective. It's all about knowing each hero's strengths and weaknesses and then rebalancing your team to keep the game moving.
That's not counter play, though. That's counter picking. The two are very different. Overwatch is a terrible example of counter play because between teams of equal skill the victor is usually decided by the characters picked before or during battle. In Overwatch the person who counter PICKS well wins. If Overwatch was a good example of counter PLAY you wouldn't have to switch characters in the middle of battle, you could just out play them.
CrazyLikeUhFox I see your point, but I don't think it's totally accurate. Just because you change to a hero that has skills that better counter another doesn't mean you are skilled enough in that to also perform what's needed to successfully counter, like a Genji who isn't very good at reflecting a Bastion, or a Bastion who is good at not getting baited into the reflect. Skilled players can still work around a character's weakness. Moving from Overwatch though, I can't think of an example off-hand, but don't most cases of counter-play require a retooling or restructuring of what you are playing fundamentally to deal with a new situation? Like swapping certain cards out of a deck that cover a weakness your opponent is going to exploit in your deck otherwise, or changing weapons in Dark Souls to something with an advantage of reach or speed.
I agree with this saying completely, and just want to add to that if you don't want to think about this in your game, make it single-player, there you will find other obstacles, but this one will be lifted
Actually, you have a bunch of options to dodge it. They did a video on it in their level design series. One of the easier ones is slowing down to hit the second player, boosting when it hits, or preserving an item.
The thing that is most amazing to me about this episode is, growing up in a highly competitive environment counter play is an idea that seams so simple to me. Yet EC are pitching it like it's some new and amazing idea.
moute3 There is little to no counter play to the monster hiding which results in the hunters running around without any idea of where the monster is. There are also very limited things the hunters can be doing besides chasing the monster. This leads to boring and repetitive hunter gameplay in the lull time, broken up only by actually finding the monster.
Sound spikes, daisy, and dust tagging are great ways to find the monster along with corpses of wildlife, birds and broken bushes to find a sneaking monster. While the hunters hunt for the monster they can place traps in choke points and hunt elite wildlife for much needed perks, helping with downtime.
moute3 Sound spikes must be placed, meaning the first 3-4 minutes of a game are spent following Griffin around so that they can be useful. In a game where time is a precious resource for the hunters, this is very very bad. Following daisy means you are walking behind an AI. Following an AI is not fun, especially when Daisy will almost never catch up to the monster on her own. Dust tagging has a limited range and sizable cooldown. Once again this means the hunters are sitting hoping for something to happen to give them a target to chase. Hunting elite wildlife does not directly contribute to finding the monster and takes up that precious time that the monster is using to become huge. Corpses give little to no indication of how recently they were killed and heavy foliage is not sparse enough to separate the knocked over from the still standing, or give an indication of when the foliage was knocked over. In relatively small maps, knocked over foliage could be recent or it could have been there for 2 minutes. Basically, the "counterplay" mechanics in Evolve involve waiting, which is boring. There are no actions that the hunters can take to directly affect the monster's play during the hunt, and by that same token, no reason for the monster to ever engage the hunters before level 3. At least in the Hunt gamemode. There are other gamemodes that encourage and even force engagements on a regular basis which is good, but there aren't enough and even then there are very limited options leading to repetitive gameplay.
+TheGreatRakatan The hunter's could use their ears to listen to monster's very loud steps or at the very least pay attention to monster's path-marks on the ground, if he left any. However, yes there is a huge lack of counter-play in evolve. And the main source of it - The Wraith. Hunters just can't counter his actions. - The bastard can teleport away, but there is no way to prevent him from doing so, or at least to catch up. - He can create a damage-dealing copy of himself, while turning invisible and run away, while copy engages the hunters and actually posses a threat to them due damage that it can deal. There is no way to counter act to this because nothing will help to find a real wraith: the copy will have all the target marks and high-lights while the only way to damage the real one - shoot into the air hoping that he's there somewhere. - When he uses his "Nova ability" the only way for hunters to counter-act is to run and since monster is, obviously slighty more faster than hunters - this is not exactly a very effective tactic. So yeah, Evolve definetly lacks counter-play where it really shouldn't.
HA! The Stricky bomb launcher is 80 times worse then even the most annoying Mini sentry. Minisentries are binary predictable and have bright flashing lights on their head. They are possibly deadly only when a engineer or his team is highly aggressive behind it. Pyros Demos and Soldiers carve though minisentries like they where air. Heavies usually plow through them and a clever scout can take them out with a quick meatshot in most cases. When up against good teams on good maps with a good combat engie I can see why it can be annoying, However on a spread even match up there is dozens of ways to take it down easily and shut down a engie. Really if you just kill the engie first minis are nothing more then slight speedbumps rather then an actual nest being a moderate speed bump. The SL on the other hand is the most flexible weapon in tf2. It has great dps does 120 damage AVERAGE has a larger splash then the rocket laucher can be used for traps and are remote detonated. It also fires faster then the RL has the second fastest reload rate and the highest projectile clip size. They can't be air-blasted but they can be air-burst. They can be shot but only on the ground and it is literally 1/2 the size of the sandman ball's hit-box. There is no downside to using it as a RL at all. In fact many feel that it's arguibly better at the RL at everything the RL is good at (minus long distance) AND can do traps and other trickery easy. Seriously if you think the Gunslinger is bad look at what the engie has to deal with constantly. He can spend over a minute setting up a normal nest only for it to fall to a -40 second charged uber. All his buildings do not get fall off calculated when they are hit. All of his "Counter classes" do over 50% damage each direct hit to his buildings. Engie was initially designed to be a great defenseive class that was hard to unroot when he was built up but now is a easy peasy pushover now that soldiers and demos can just hit 150 damage with penetration at a fire rate far faster then the wrench can possibly hope to match.
Ways I counter gunslinger minis. 1. Use a direct hit (or and decent rocket launcher, standerd works fine) 2. Spy (Spy will always counter sentrys not matter what) 3. Sniper (the sniper is probably the best for destroing mini sentrys as they can destroy them with ease at range)
Though much less popular, I also see this happen a lot in Enemy Territory, an objective-based shooter. The defenders on the high ground use snipers, and the attackers call in artillery to damage and scare away those snipers. Then the defenders get more medics to heal up their fired-upon teammates, and hold off the opponents in close combat. This causes ammo to be used up more rapidly, so some of the snipers and medics will switch to field ops, a class that can provide ammo. On and on it goes!
Nothing is more painfully ironic than when someone goes to League of Legends to show examples of good anything. It's one of the most poorly designed games out there.
yunikage It's just called playing video games, most people who think League has good design have League as the only game they've played in it's genre. You can play the worst fighting game too, but if it's the only one you have ever seen you're going to be impressed by some aspects.
Fran Madaraki I wouldn't say it's the best, there's far worse *Cough Prime World Cough*. But with League and Dota as the leaders in the genre, both are pretty well designed for what they do. Argue how they seem balanced against each other, Dota has more depth while League is for faster 'funner' play. Also this was made in 2012, when the balance of League is quite different than the balance of it now.
Fran Madaraki League could be better, true (graphics being one example). BUT if you deny its values, both in terms of gameplay and design, you're overlooking way too much. If you've played only a few matches in League and decided "Yeah, that's crap," you definitely haven't seen all. I'd urge you to try it again. If, in the end, it's not your game, just don't play it, no need to hate on it. I don't like DotA and HoN, but I'll never post something saying "DotA / HoN / Smite is crap." They're not, if there are people who enjoy them, awesome for them. The fact that I don't like them doesn't mean they're bad. Happy New Year :)
Mario Krastanov I actually played League from beta for about 2-3 years (Up until Zed came out) and was generally around 1650 elo. I have more than enough experience with the game. League does the genre no justice once you experience other games in it (Namely Dota). The spells are uncreative and generally cookie cutter stuff while forcing in a cash shop and grind aspects that you need to do in order to play on a even playing field. That's great you'll never say a game is bad, but the world isn't a hug box. There is nothing GOOD about League, that isn't a copied/watered down version of something originally in coughDotacough.
Fran Madaraki I am well aware that DotA was the very first moba game, and one I spent a good deal of my time into btw :) but ultimately, I felt more drawn to LoL, and actually I can't really say why. By the time DotA 2 came out, I tried it, but it didn't really capture my attention. It was then that I saw Extra Credits' episode on Counter Play that I realised why I liked LoL: namely the option that targeted skill shots give, with their clear targeting reticules visible to both the player using the abilities and the players that they would be used on. That explains it for me, really, nothing more that that. It was frustrating for me otherwise to die from something I couldn't play against.
Glad you made this... I've been using this quite some time now, and I've always been telling people to keep it in mind when I get the chance. Now I can just refer them to this!
Balance is a very hard thing not only to create, but also to see ^_^ Dota and LoL are both great examples of that (I have less experience with LoL, so I may be wrong about it). A lot of characters are called OP by new players, but after some time spent with a game and your understanding of the game grows, they stop to seem as OP as before or even visa-versa< under powered needing a buff. Still balance is never perfect and with each patch that will improve on some points, new problems will occure
Granted balancing can be difficult, but if your entire episode is based around balance, why choose a game that does a terrible job at it as a shining example? Riot is notorious for saying one thing and doing the complete opposite (whether by intention or accident). Also LOL, just like its predecessor DOTA, is unbalanced by design. Its what made DOTA popular. If a game is too balanced, too skill centric, then the average player doesn't stand a chance. In in both LOL and DOTA there is a large random factor, coupled with snowballing, small and otherwise insignificant events can completely and unalterably change the course of the game. This is by design, so that poorer/less skilled players will still win quite often. Granted over enough games (100's - 1000's) the skilled players will win more, but in any given game, the outcome is so close to 50:50 that skill might as not matter. This is why DOTA was more popular than normal WC3, the latter caters to skilled players while the former to unskilled. The one thing DOTA and hence LOL did so well was to show how lucrative it was to cater to the lowest common denominator. Balance, e-sports, just like tribunal, are just a PR stunt. Riot knows that if they were to actually balance the game, they'd lose most of their biggest paying customers. They aren't foolish enough to do that.
I'm quite sure that you have not played DotA/LoL long enough to understand how these games work. They (DotA especially imo) have very high learning curve and undoubtfully skillbased. WC3/Starcraft and DotA/LoL require different kind of skill, and shouldn't be compared (you don't compare CS to Street Fighter, do you?).
Ahh here it comes, the inevitable 'ad hominem' attacks. Despite knowing nothing about me, clearly I dislike league because I'm a bad player. There's clearly no other option... DOTA and LOL do not have a high learning curve; and they are not significantly difference, mechanics-wise, than WC3. Counter Strike and Street Fighter are completely different, DOTA/LOL is WC3 with AI controlled minions.
Would you argue that the sniper stream in Halo, as well as the scope glint in BF3 is a good example of counter play? It gives the chance for people on the receiving end of the bullet can find the sniper, and means that the sniper has to keep an eye out as they are not completely safe.
Surprised fighting games weren't mentioned more Though ofc it's a 5 minute episode, and a good one at that; ty for bringing attention to this concept it's something i talk/think about a lot
Ever hear of the spinoff of shadowrun where it's a first person shooter? The best counter play i've ever played. They literally designed each spell with one countering it.
Five years later and it's safe to say, counter play is part of what absolutely defines balance in League of Legends. It has even moved into being something that is just part of normal League and even gaming lexicon. Really good job summing it up in the early days of the concept here though.
I'd love to see an update about this with a focus on CC and stun locking mechanic's in multiplayer games specifically, but single player too. (I far to often find far to many games that use these mechanic's in a way that limits skill and creates a very obvious dominant play style)
because, it's just like he says near the end-the counter play thing makes a game more enjoyable for the whole group, instead of a single player. The insanely competitive nature of most COD players leaves them only wanting to be #1-not just on the winning team, not even necessarily having the most fun, but purely for the status of 'the best'.
A beautiful example of counter play I had recently was going up against a Soldier-Medic combo who had the Beggar's Bazooka and a charged Kritzkrieg. Unable to take an alternate route to attack the Medic as a Scout, I used the Baby Face's Blaster and Bonk to make myself a lightning fast and briefly invincible target, then stayed right in the Soldier's face when he fired three rockets at point blank range, all of which exploded on me, but only ended up gibbing himself and spoiling their momentum.
Planetside 2. This has great counter play, with Scouts who fly and kill infiltrators and heavies who kill tanks, the engies who repair the tanks. Medics who bring the dead back to life, and the Max units who can kill any infantry. Not only are there limits to who can use what, when they can use it or where it should be used, but the dynamic is that if the game is played solo, you can still get somewhere with the skills that help both the player and the team (Medic's self heal helps everyone)
This concept is not only restricted to video games. My friends started a LARP group some number of years ago which inevitably dissolved. When they were writing in the abilities in the begining, or adding in a new game mechanic, they never considered what effect it would have on the players.
Defense of the Ancients was a custom Warcraft III map based on the custom Star Craft map Aeon of Strife. Even though AoS was the genre maker DotA was the genre codifier. Because DotA was the game that became popular all games that followed its structure were labeled as DotA clones, similar to how FPS games were called Doom clones. Because of this Riot Games coined the term Multiplayer Online Battle Arena as a marketing term in an attempt to differentiate itself thus giving a name to the genre.
One of the best examples of counter play is Dota 2. So many layers of it: vision, position, itemization, skill combinations lay way to endless mindgames and optimizing your own decisions. That's why you see the "metagame" shift constantly, because players always figure out new ways to deal with the opponents.
The original guild wars did this amazingly, many skills would put the decision in the enemies hands after the skill was cast, and the decision-making would pass from team to team every few seconds for amazing fast-paced teamfights - However this did make a huge learning curve (biggest i've ever played, even more than dota). Guild Wars was such a brilliant game with amazing teamplay and mechanics - such a shame they decided to abandon all the things that made it great when making gw2.
For a game with as little PVP as Vindictus has, it is is brilliant example of this. To do well in PVP, you need to have a basic understanding of the tactics that the opponent's class is based around using, as well as the skill to execute your own tactics and the quick thinking to adapt your strategy if it isn't working. There is also a reasonable amount of counter-play in the way you use your teammates in PVE battles. You can try to keep a nuker and tank formation, tag-team to deal damage when your buddy gets the aggro, or fight independently.
Thanks for this topic, guys. Counterplay makes games more fun for anyone who experiments with it. Feels topical to me. I got really pissed off the other day when a friend of mine duelled me in YuGiOh, with a deck made specifically to counter mine, that won in just a few turns... I'm sure there are options "out there" to deal with the strategy he was using, I just hadn't built them in and I ended up feeling there was nothing I could do. It was very frustrating.
Which is that everything is deadly and what you use depends on which weapon you like best and fits your play style. While some weapons have a better use in some situations,such situations are very hard to set up and maintain and you can either attack from another direction,use the same weapon for the same advantage,or using another weapon that might offer superior advantage in some way. Ergo,there's no "X counters Y" set up and it's all about how you want to play.
I guess it's cool how you mention counter play after talking to the LoL guy. It's also pretty cool how DotA has been doing the same thing for years... and years... and years...and years before LoL was even being made. On a non dota/lol hate related buisness, the effects on mechanics for both teams is a good point and needs to be paid attention too, but you also should mention about how your abilities and mechanics affect your ALLIES.
I think a good game for counter play is the new Star Wars Battlefront. Being able to get in a fighter and rain down aerial support is fun for the person doing it, but it's also really cool for the people on the ground to see. It also comes into play with power ups like being able to play as a jedi. The jedi is having a blast being a jedi while the other team's players feel really good when they finally beat him; it's like beating a boss. This also comes in the walker assault mode where the rebels are at a clear disadvantage, but the sheer possibility of defeating such a difficult enemy is gratifying. It's one of those things that makes you jump out of your seat and yell "YES!" when it happens. Battlefront creates counter play by making certain "bad" things immersive and visually striking or by giving you a sense of gratification by defeating something naturally stronger than you.
Another good,but odd example of this is the Huntsman in tf2, it may seem like a small thing,but it opens up a large range of tactics. For example, is an enemy sniper is using the huntsman, he can get headshots at close range and have a good mid range fire as well,and a pyro facing the huntsman can reflect the arrows back at his teamates, and it even opens up choices on the snipers team,as a friendly pyro can light his arrow and use the fire damage against,lets say, an over-healed heavy.
Take it from someone who has played competitive cod4 promod for years and fps's for many more. The game IS competitive, it IS addictive, and (sans the recent titles) it has fair counterplay. Just because CoD is hated by a lot of people, doesn't mean you have to hate it.
Extra Games FPS Weapon #001: Flower Wrench: If you get hit with the Flower Wrench, you get a flower on your head. That saps your HP, becoming a health pickup on your death, but it also makes you faster, and if you hit someone while under the effect, it knocks them back more and gives the effect to them. The effect can only be removed with death or Tinselwrapped weapons. Friendly fire is recommended.
This is actually a more complete explanation of something I've attempted to explain to my girlfriend, who loves video games and talks to me about them a lot. The conversation usually starts with, "Wouldn't it be awesome if x, y, z?", and eventually she ends up piling on a laundry list of things that would be awesome if an individual character could do vs. other characters. In the past, my response has been, "you can't make everything too awesome or nobody could do anything to counter it."
This sounds like a very interesting concept. I've experienced many times when anotehr player is able to completely decimate what I throw at them because of some special item or weapon they have. WOW was notorious for this. If you came across someone with a high-level weapon and you didn't have it, you were screwed.
In Yu-Gi-Oh!, missing the timing is a mechanic that limits the number of situations an effect can be activated, and also give opponents ways to play against the effect (making something miss the timing) in several ways (see Card Rulings: Geartown for example). The worst part is that missing the timing is overcomplicated, and even wording of card texts ("then" and "also, after that") are relevant to missing the timing. Other simpler rules changes that make the gamer simpler and create counterplay are new SEGOC (easier to dodge negation) and the removal of Ignition Effect Priority (able to deny activation of Ignition Effects).
That is interesting. That is probably why elemental paper-rock-scissors works so well. It is so much fun to figure that out and apply it. If an opponent tries to use a certain element against you, it is fun to choose an element on your team to counter it. It is in Pokemon. For example I had a tricky time tying to fight against a Decidueye. It is mainly a grass type. However it gets a bit more complicated with dual types and attack types.A great way to counter a grass Pokemon is to kill it with fire. It is tricky when my fire type Pokemon, Inceneroar, is too weakened to fight and it is the only decent counter to Decidueye on my team. I eventually won the battle, even though it was tough. It was so much fun. When I try designing my own game, I did think of conterplay without really realizing the issues. I still have a elemental paper-rock-sizzors. My parallel to grass is the wood element. One can still kill it with fire. One can also choose to kill it with ice, poison, metal, dark or cosmic. I also have classes in my game. I was wondered how those can be countered, even though they lack a paper-rock-sizors relationship. I figured that one can use the opposite class. Then they can use attacks to cancel out the effects in the opponent. For example hunter is a class the Decidueye resembles. In my game hunter is the speedy class. It excels at depleting their enemy's energy and make them unable to fight back. The opposite of this is the warrior. It has good endurance and it can replenish its energy. The warrior can counter a hunter, because it can replenish the energy the hunter depleted. Using opposite classes is something I would do to counter the class of the opponent. Using the same class is another strategy that could work. If the class depletes health or energy, it would be a race to the bottom. If the class replenishes health or energy, it would be a battle of attrition. I wonder what if I got an opponent that was a wood hunter. A good counter is a fire warrior. It can nullify the attacks and press advantage. A fire hunter could also work. It can deplete the energy of a wood warrior quickly. There are many more options. One can use a metal warrior or a poison hunter for example. I would like to use an ice warrior. When I first tested my game, I like to pick electric and earth as my elements. I then found ice to be very helpful for my team, because it contributed the best element coverage to add to the other two elements.
The first thing I thought of when I heard LoL an the concept of counter play was wish they thought of that when Darius was in development, but then I realized some of my favorite moments were when I picked Kayle against him (or anyone who can dodge it) So I guess LoL really is good about doing this.
This is pretty cool to see, since this is a lot older than the Riot stuff I've seen lately. Riot is really good at setting up the counterplay stuff. Sometimes they go overboard and give more counterplay than actual play (Sona rework lmao) BUT they still set up a lot of really good stuff for the most part. They ALWAYS mention counterplay on their patch notes too, so they're not very tight lipped about this; in fact, they're so open about it that you can tell what they're thinking every time they make a patch or add a character, etc. They describe what they're thinking of doing the whole way through and that's pretty badass.
No, new Fiora is much, MUCH better than old Fiora. Point and click =/= no counterplay. This kind of mentality is making Riot turn stuff into skillshots. It's not smart. It's okay for champions to have guaranteed damage or CC.
You're confusing having tools to outplay you with having a toxic kit. The only part of Fiora's new kit that could be considered "toxic" is her % true damage. You can outplay her now.
ArvelDreth Yes, you can? Dude, she went freakin' untreatable before for like 2.5 seconds. Just because now she gets to parry incoming stuff for .75 does not make her op. It requires great predicting/reaction from her and even then, if she blocked that stuff that means she's far enough (no way she's going to react an Ashe arrow point-blank unless she really deserves it) that you can get away from her; her dash isn't that long. You talk about her W as if it was some sort of unfair skill or something, and it's not. If you consider "building thornmail/two hundred armor" fun counterplay then good for you, but old Fiora was both toxic and unviable. You're assuming that she is ulting you ALONE nearby your tower. That is a single case of her ult and does not make the ability properly counterable. You can still counter her new ult moving around. Hell she is TELLING YOU where she's going to strike. Also lol @ complaining about Fiora's magic damage xd.
I taught the counter to Sollys were Demomans and Pyros and the counter to a heavy medic is a combination of classes. I can imagine a sniper being very useful to counter that one.
What are perks like flak jacket and ghost then? They're counter play to the uav and explosives, both of which you can gain easier access to in the game through certain perks.
Has that gotten better? I played extensively in the era of Red and Blue, but I never had a satisfying battle against a human. They are either status battles, where someone's sleep inducing pokemon is faster and luckier than the other person's, or they are raw powerfests, where the player who has a level advantage steamrolls the other.
There's kind of an example of this in Halo 4. One of the specializations allows you to know which player just killed you, and paints them on the map, so you can go get revenge if you want.
Animal having an arm race is great examples of counter play. Arm races can be symmetric where one tree tries to grow taller then another, which probably isn't counter play. But asymmetric arm races where a tree make poisonous leaves til kill insects, which develop resistance. Zebras learn to duck in response to ancestral humans lasso hunting. Gazelles stotting to avoid being eaten. Bats evolving extreme immune system to fend off parasites. etc.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I feel like the ultimate game in terms of counter play is probably Scrabble. Every word you play opens up new options for your opponent.
AND SUPPORT FROM ONE RANDOM COMMENTER!
When my family and I play we usually end up doing the oppiste.
And at the same time it shuts down options when they take the letter you plan to use
IndustrialGradePartyPooper that is a good idea
This is not entirely true. There was no counter to my strategy of using as many 2 or 3 letter words to annoy my step mom when I was a teenager. I guess in a sense I didn’t win any games, but I was banned from ever playing with her again and that was a better victory to me.
Example: the Falcon Punch. It provides an insanely satisfying, powerful hit on the opponent provided the player can get a good read on them, or set up with good positioning and combos. But it's also really weak in that if it misses, the opponent gets a huge opening for a strong punish. It's satisfying to pull off, satisfying to punish, and fun to watch either way.
Liked because of PAUNCH
FALcon *P U N C H*
plus the fact that it fills a button
okay hear me out here
falcon already has some pretty great stuff. his up air is good because it can go into his forward air, he's got a solid back air, his down air is a meteor with a huge hitbox, and his f-air is STRONGURU KNEEU. his smash attacks are pretty garbage besides forward and even then it's basically a more practical falcon punch (im really tired when writing this so i can't even remember the last time i used his down smash), his up b is pretty good if you pretend spacies don't exist and his side b is pretty bad
now all of those good aerials combined with his HOT TAMALI speed (we're including that yung lateral airspeed) means that putting something like a shine in his neutral b would be hell on fuckin earth for everyone involved, right
so we have something fun but pretty much useful in somewhat competitive play instead
its 3 am here okay
*S H O W Y A M O V E S*
As opposed to counters, which just makes you grab a lot.
Assassin's Creed Multiplayer does this REALLY well. It's why I play that way more than any other online game. Someone may have a special ability, but instead of ruining balance for other players, it just means you have to try and find a way around it - and there usually is as there is such a good range of abilities that don't completely overpower others. Plus their usage is limited so even if you do have the most powerful ability, your use of it is restricted and you must rely on actual skill.
Thanks guys, definitely had an 'Aha!' moment here, even after the fifth time watching this. Was prototyping a card effect 'Inquisition' where, when you destroy an opponents card, you choose one of their cards to discard. Now, I'm switching that to where the losing side has to choose which card they destroy. Now it's no longer a 'force of nature' per se, but a potentially difficult choice, and one that provides options for the one under that effect! :)
Now I know the exact word why TF2 is so much fun!
For every Sniper, there is a Spy or Scout that can counter him.
For every Soldier, there is a Pyro or Demoman that can counter him.
For every Medic combo, there is another Medic combo that can counter it.
It's an FPS that actually did Counter Play and Risk VS Reward right. Every weapon has a slight difference to it which forces you to react in a different way. Is the Soldier using a Direct Hit instead of the normal Rocket Launcher? Then he does less splash damage so be sure to dodge his rockets and move in on him before he can reload! Has the enemy team a bunch of Phlogging Pyros? Pick your own Pyro, grab the Degreaser and a Shotgun and you'll have the time of your life!
Counter Play. A term to remember.
My thoughts exactly. The best matches I play in TF2 are always the ones in which my team sees the other team's composition and rearranges according to that composition. Also, the Pyro's airblast is a fantastic example of an actual mechanic that balances play and makes it interesting for everyone.
I wish more public server players could understand this more. You get intellegent players that play the classes that will benefit their team or counter the enemy, then players who just play sniper and scout no matter what. The classes of a team is what decides who wins for the most part, the skills of the player just makes it easier.
Honestly, that's not the best example of counterplay. What makes TF2's counterplay good is that even in an unfavorable matchup like Sniper vs. Spy, or Spy vs. Pyro, there's still room for outplays. You still have ways to come out on top if you're playing Sniper against Spy, or Spy against Pyro.
@@dragonslair951167 this channel needs to talk about generalists and specialists. The best classes in tf2 (the meta) is a demo, soldier, scout, and medic
soldier isnt countered by anyone. Hes made that way so he also doesnt counter anyone
That sniper part; I can still feel all the times when it's happened to me! The pain!!!
Since I'm into game designing/programming, these videos are pretty helpful for me :D
Foregone Destruction, the music from the most widely played Unreal tournament map, on the video about good multiplayer design...I like.
Rainbox Six: Siege does an awesome job of this. For example, there is a bear trap that can be placed next to windows. Hop through the window, hit the bear trap, and you die.
But, this gives you options
1) Use a valuable grenade to blow up the trap
2) As you hop through the window, shoot the trap. However, you are helpless for the brief second it takes to destroy the trap
3) Rappel upside down from above the window, shoot the trap, then enter. However, this wastes valuable time.
4) Enter somewhere else.
Design like this makes R6: Siege a really fun game.
Oh man, that music at the end, loved the facing worlds map on Unreal Tournament GOTY
+Extra Credits Hey! the description is partially broken!
"Grey Jenkins is a pretty skilled artist, in case you didnapos;t know."
You know where the mistake is.
+SlidingSilver Perhaps they originally wrote it for the EC site in HTML, being forced to encode ' as '
I am not a gamer. I would hardly call myself a casual gamer. But somehow this is really interesting to me. I am surrounded by people who play a lot of games and it's interesting to see how games work. I also like that this show shines a light on games as art. I've never thought of games as art. Great show. You guys are doing an amazing job ^^.
I have been playing A LOT of Battlefield 4 lately. This reminds me of the grenades in that game. For example, when they enemy throws a napalm grenade at you the fire makes a really cool effect. I get hurt, the enemy feels good because they do damage to an enemy. And I get a cool lightshow. :D
Well, the counter-play would be more about you being able to, say, avoid the enemy or fool him into wasting grenades.
I guess that enjoying the visual effects of the grenade works, too. ^_^
It's weird how pictures can add to words. Daniel talked about fixing problems, accompanied by a picture of Fry and Leelah. My brain went "Fix it fix it fix it fix it fix it fix it fix it! ... Fix it fix it!"
tf2 pulls off counter play rather well. if you get headshoted too much you become a spy sneak behind and stab him. get back stabbed too may times? be a pyro. over powered turrets? demo man or spies are both good for getting rid of obscure turrets that turn even the heavy with the most health into giblets.
Switching classes to deal with something isn't an example of counter-play. That kind of rock-paper-scissor gameplay is frankly boring so let's all be thankful TF2 avoids it.
Part of what makes TF2 great is learning and improving by sticking to a class and overcoming some difficulty. When a sniper learns how to watch for and deal with spies they can see themselves breaking through the mold of class-counters. That is counter-play, it means they have evolved as a player into something more than just a class with predefined strengths and weaknesses. Meanwhile the sniper that switches to pyro whenever he gets backstabbed will stay forever stuck in his mold.
***** I think both count as counterplay, on two basic levels, on the one hand, newer players can switch to hard class counters, given how easy class switching is, this is a valid form of counterplay. As the player grows in skill, the learn counters outside of the original hard class counters, giving them even more options to deal with the problem.
*****, also, it's a good idea for snipers in TF2, like snipers in real life, to have a designated spotter, someone to be more situationally aware of the sniper's immediate surroundings than the sniper. Medics work well for this because they can not only watch out for spies while the sniper shoots away, but they can also benefit from the sniper's kills by healing him while they act as his spotter.
Another tactic I've seen is having a sentry and dispenser making up the sniper's nest while a pyro with one of the sapper smashing melee weapons be his spotter.
Another tactic is to have the sniper and a heavy (with the Hu Long Heater) use the same dispenser and keep the sniper within the range of the ring of fire.
Teamwork is important.
Tom Arundell YES exactly and if you dont know where the sniper is you get a freezecam of him.
A ton of the counter play elements they said in World of tanks are also largely present in the Advanced Wars series because everyone has the potential to use all units in the game, making it all about reading into your opponents tactics. Probably one of my favorite strategy games ever.
Grey uses a lot more real drawings than stock art, which most guest artists don't do. I like him
League adding Yuumi, so many meaningful choices your opponent can make...
Halo's sniper gameplay (in standard modes, on games 2, 3, Reach, and maybe CE) could actually be used as an example of excellent Counter Play, for the following reasons:
1. Each shot draws a line to the sniper's location. While the competent sniper will immediately move, this at least shows where they were, and therefore the probable areas they will move to.
2. De-scoping -- If the sniper takes fire, they de-scope, which makes it much more difficult to hit their targets. So, led by the tracer line, allies (or you, if you survived the first shot) have a good chance to counter the sniper with common mid-range weapons.
3. It's a power weapon, and therefore only spawns occasionally, and with a limited amount of ammo. Even if the sniper is not directly countered, they will eventually run out of ammo and need to go back to the sniper rifle spawnpoint, which is usually in a location ill-suited for sniping (close quarters), where opposing players have a chance to prevent the re-supply.
All that aside, active camouflage, good map design, other power weapons, and vehicles all offer ample opportunity for creative ways to counter snipers. They simply require you to think instead of panicking.
Of course, none of this makes up for incompetence in basic gameplay, and a good sniper will be able to dominate inexperienced players, but that's true in any skill-based game -- especially real-time ones. Among reasonably well-matched players, the sniper gameplay is extraordinarily well-balanced and can be satisfying for both parties.
Vehicles in Halo also have excellent Counter Play, hijacking/boarding being among the most satisfying FPS mechanics I have encountered . . . along with plasma grenades, plasma pistols, and other power weapons. It's fun to go on a vehicle spree, and it's fun to blow up or take over opposing vehicles.
+Srebrnic1 Every pixel of it!
Srebrnic1 XD Ah, is that what this is about? I am already cured; I own no consoles, and prefer PC versions of Halo, where they exist. Alas that mostly they don't!
This is definitely evident in the Smash Bros. series
For great conceptualizing of counter play, I would suggest David Sirlin's Playing to win. A great look into the depth of what fighting game is at the heart of it's game play: Counter Strategies and Meta Game (meaningful choices that have a 51% or greater chance of being the best in this situation among all choices in this situation)
Kill streaks in cod have the worst counter play ever. You cannot stop these stupid heat seeking missiles that take no skill to use and you just die over and over when it's not even your fault.
One of the many reasons cod multiplayer sucks
+Battle Ox I know what you mean. although there might be one or two perks for getting around killstreaks, they don't work all the Time, and they do not make the Game more intresting. They just narrow down your options.
***** I disagree. At least in black ops 2, ive created various loadouts to counter killstreaks. Ghost + Rocket launcher with lock on + black hat + that perk that makes you inmune to AI controled ones.
Using this ive turnes the tables in more than one match. They simply couldnt keep launching killstreaks because i was destroing them. And on the mean time i was dying either getting shot were black hatting (i dont think thats a word) or locking on the target. That isnt the best counterplay, i give you that, but it works.
A Derp ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡ °)
Yeah, It works. somehow. but it doesn't fel very good, soming to the pouint where some perks are the best osr whatnot.
I haven't played BO2 much.
But wouldn't the players still be able to hit you with things like the hellfire missile? you just need to stand amongst teammates, or have someone who doesn't initially see other people because they are out of his field of view, so he has the time to recognize you even though you are not marked. or do you disappear completely in the eyes of Killstreaks in BO2?
I know, that people still can see you in MW3 with their killstreaks. you just go unmarked.
I know this is old but I always found the dogs worse then the missiles since (at least the ones I played) you can hide in a building to avoid them
Don't later games fix that by making, say, your chopper a big target that would grant anyone who destroyed it multiple killstreak advances?
This is my issue with Sombra in Overwatch. Her whole schtick is that she decreases what her opponents can do, and that’s not fun.
True, but thats when counter play comes in. any class that can ket kills without relying too much on their abilities would kill Sombra. Zarya, Solider 76, mcree. Every hero has a counter.
I really liked this episode! I think not only the content was verry interesting, but also the art made it really fun to watch. i´d liketo see the artist again in future videos!
Tell me more about Fed Fizz Counterplay or Fed Rengar Counterplay. Old video, but still relevant.
Weak laning phase
DONT FEED THE RENGAR/FIZZ
There is no lane phase in the jungle. Haha.
+Moacir Rodrigues actually there is: when the laners are in a lane. it describes a time frame, not a situation, and in lane phase rengar has weak ganks because clears very badly and ha snot very strong ganks, he has to snowball.
Also, while Fizz has counterplay, Rengar not so much and counterplay against him relies on prevention; aniway, in Rengar case many devs do not feel him alright so they plan to take measures in some way.
Plus, even thought there are edge cases that needs some assestment, Riot stance is actually to have counterplay and skill fun for the enemy and that can be seen in most of the updated champions.
Rengar bad clear fizz horrendous clear rengar bad ganks fizz bad ganks rengar no escape
This isnt counterplay. This is weakness. The counterplay for Zed -> Buying Zhonyas or QSS. You can change your playstyle to counter the enemy playstyle.
Errrrrrmmaaaaaaaagerrrrrd, that ending song! As it was fading in, my mind was hilariously racing for what song that was!!! It's so faint, but man, that's facing Worlds, just heavily (but exceptionally) remixed. Wow. So many memories...
Extra Credits at 0:44, is that a picture of a UOIT lecture hall?
The facing worlds soundtrack at the end was just wonderfull.
One shooter that does this well is Blacklight Retribution, what with its extremely complementing weapon system that allows players to, if playing together, really try and build a cohesive team capable of dealing with differing threats at various ranges.
Counter point: Overwatch is now a game where you pick your characters based solely on countering the top frag of the enemy team. Oh they have a mercy? Im on reaper/pharrah. Oh theres a lucio doing well? Ill counter him with X. I feel like counter play can be good, and make a game more interesting. But I personally want my multiplayer games to be an open environment with even classes, not a rock paper scissors match with better graphics.
TF2 does that well.
Counterpicking and counter play are different concepts
was the ending credits music an unreal tournament 2004 soundtrack?
A good example of bad counterplay is, ironically, counterspells in Magic: The Gathering. This concept's existed over there for a while, though they call it interactivity. When playing against a deck with a lot of counters, you end up just... not being able to do anything unless your opponent says okay. That's not fun, engaging, or likely to do good things for your blood pressure. It's not even skill-intensive for the guy playing it, you just don't let your opponent do anything.
Compare that to Giant Growth. I will go on record as saying that Giant Growth is the best card in the game, in the sense that it makes playing it more engaging. Being able to, at any time, temporarily make one of your creatures bigger is enormous. The very *existence* of such an ability makes combat decisions more interesting even in games where it's never played.
THAT ISN'T IRONIC IT'S COOINCIDENTAL
Actually, counterspells can give some good counter-play because then the game becomes about feignts. if you can get something through that doesn't seem too dangerous but can then use effectively without other vulnerable spells, or sucker the opponent into wasting their last counter or tapping out for something that you don't actually need, you can get the upper hand in a very clever and satisfying manner.
That's true... if you only have one or two in your deck. They're fine in limited. But in Constructed, it's too easy to load up on them and just say no to everything, and not have to decide whether this is worth blowing a valuable counterspell on.
Yes, a deck based on Countering and stalling, even hate bears, can be incredibly frustrating to play against. Hell, the best Magic deck I've personally seen was nothing but counter spells and man-lands. However, there are always, always ways around that. Having a swarm of weak, cheat creatures you can pump out and, as you said, Giant Growth. Or hell, countering their counter spells.
Yes, there are, but it still bogs te game down and makes it less fun rather than more.
For anyone interested, Tom Caldwell did a talk at GDC 2013, like this video mentions he was hoping to, where he elaborates on the concept in more depth in how Riot used it. It's even on youtube now: it's called "Riot's Counterplay and Teamplay in Multiplayer Game Design"
UT Face soundtrack at the end? Kregysam
Talking about my experience in MW 1&2 I used to switch to a build specificly designed to shoot down enemy killstreak rewards, even the scouting drones with a rocket launcher or sometimes even with my gun when I realized I'm in the inferior team. That ended up winning me many matches, because once my teams killstreak rewards started kicking in my team had a big advantage over the enemy.
I think XCOM: Enemy Unknown is the best example of counter play. Mainly, it has to do with how they divide classes: Heavy, Assault, Sniper, and Support. We've seen in other games (TF2) that there are more ways to divide up the skill sets, but this palette of characters stands a good representation for strategic gameplay.
Heavy is the simplest and strongest right off the bat. They aren't overly mobile or accurate with their main weapon, but have a high ceiling in terms of damage. The rocket is a reliable means of clearing an area and dealing lots of damage at a time. A majority of the time, the upgrades have to do with getting more ammo and chances to shoot, so even an elite Heavy is still very introductory in terms of strategy. The depth comes from the high amounts of explosives, which can alter the map quickly if used properly (aka. blowing cover and creating entryways).
The Assault is a high-risk, high-reward approach. They have average mobility and typically utilize a high-damage, but short-range weapon. This means that they force the opponent to respond to their presence, but if they are left in a bad spot, there's not much helping them. With upgrades, they become super useful in flushing out enemies or rushing one strong target. It takes a little bit to adjust to the features available, but is still an accessible way to play.
Sniper has the highest accuracy and damage rate, but requires a lot of patience and strategy. Starting out, Snipers are not all that useful; they rely on upgrades to increase their depth. Once that threshold is crossed, however, they make a great fallback option, though they still rely on strategy, mainly positioning and timing.
The Support is the least offensive and most strategic. They are extremely mobile and can heal or provide cover for everyone. They are typically stuck with basic weapons, so they can hold their own but won't be the biggest contributors in terms of damage.
Basically, it works like Rock-Paper-Scissors + a Wild Card. Heavy beats Sniper, Assault beats Heavy, and Sniper beats Assault. Obviously, there are exceptions to this when you have someone who is simply that good at the game, or if there is a big enough difference in ranks.
Heavy beats Sniper because they can do lots of damage very quickly while simultaneously knocking out cover. The rocket is the only weapon that rivals the Sniper's range, and since Snipers don't typically boast a lot of health, this is a huge factor. Heavies have the advantage of being juggernauts of health, so Sniping them takes time. Moreover, Snipers require a clear line of sight to their target, something that the Heavy can just make themselves.
Assault beats Heavy because they too boast a lot of health, but have a clear advantage in mobility. If you're able to successfully rush a Heavy, they can't really go anywhere that the Assault can't follow. Also, until you get into the very high ranks, the Assault has a much high fire rate.
Sniper beats Assault because Assault lacks the fire range and explosive arsenal that the Heavy gets. Getting close to a target usually also includes getting in a line of sight, and unless you can reach a Sniper unnoticed (which is nearly impossible due to the layout of the game), they are most likely going to get a few shots in before you can touch them.
The support can cancel out certain deficiencies depending on how you upgrade them. They can replenish a little health and provide some small boosts in cover no matter what, but the choice is yours to go one way or the other, or walk the line in-between. There are a lot of options here, and that makes this the Wild Card. The added difficulty comes in that you also have to keep an eye on their health and cover as well as the person they are supporting.
There are definitive pros and cons to any approach you take in playing the game, be it against Aliens or other players.
Mozata Pumishmumi
Yeah, I think that game is a very nice example :3
Mozata Pumishmumi But then you've got the MEC Troopers in the expansion, who deal more damage than the Snipers, have more health than the Heavies, and (with certain upgrades) are faster than the Supports, with more options to blow away cover.
I guess it is slightly mitigated by the fact that they cannot enter cover, thus making them a massive target for anyone who can see them, and the fact that their huge cost means you'll probably only be able to build and upgrade one MEC Trooper in your whole playthrough.
STARCRAFT
+Mozata Pumishmumi With the Sniper, picking the squad sight skill is an insanely obvious no-brainer that happens for almost every sniper ever. The alternative is the snap shot ability, which allows you to move and shoot in the same turn, but when you're sacrificing almost infinite range for it, AND getting an additional accuracy penalty on top of the penalties you already incur for being anything less than your maximum range, it hurts FAR more often than it can help. If you had squad sight as the starting skill, not only would snipers be useful from the moment they gain their class, but they'd have more variety in how they're played. You could either have that really hard hitting head shot sniper, or slightly less power, but with a bit of mobility.
Enemy Within reduced the accuracy penalty for snap shot, but it still compares failtastically against squad sight. If they made squad sight increase the range where the accuracy penalty kicks in so you can't effectively shoot enemies you can see without squad sight, that would potentially balance it without giving every sniper the skill by default, but there are a lot of players who already hate seeing their snipers missing close-range shots because of the way range penalties are applied to the weapon.
I like to think about xcom multiplayer as "rock paper scissors lizard spock"
ya awesome video keep them coming, there just something so special about learning the games from the inside and what designer have to think to give a great game
Team Fortress 2 uses Counter Play SO RIGHT, its amazing. Its balanced. Spys can get one hit kills, but their defenses are horrible. Heavies can give a lot of damage, but are desperately slow.
Heavies' miniguns got nerfed because even though being slow, they could just position properly to avoid fire, becoming a super-tanky pick-off class. Also the Huo-Long heatmaker made it much harder to get them while escorting carts and reduce their vulnerability to Spies, since they will be lit up on fire and unable to escape invisible.
To sum it up, i love ValVe's dynamic balance system. In one update you can find something top strat and the next one just blows it apart adding an obvious counter or just a brake, meanwhile others change. That makes the meta change and force strat changes.
That's balance, not counterplay.
It' is counter play when you consider it's a team based game. I've seen team members play the same class over and over again in the same round just because its a standard strategy. Set the Engi here, send 3 spies, etc, you can always counter a good team by being creative enough.
lightingbolt85 TF2 has good counter play with the Sniper Rifle. When the Sniper is scoped for a headshot, a dot of their team color appears on the map where they are aiming. Even the Machina will leave a tracer round after the Sniper fires letting people know where he fired from.
Uh, I know there's discussions going on and all, but I really just want to express my excitement over the excellent CTF-Face remix at the end of this video.
I really don't get Riot on this one.. They have people like Tom Cadwell at their hands and still regularly introduce mechanics that are unbelievably counter intuitive to this design concept. It's not about how "OP" for example a Teemo shroom is (This tearm is absurdly overused anyways). It's about how it's shredding the gaming experience of everyone on the enemy team.
they've only been using these principles for some time now, most of the older abilities were more inspired by dota, just compare the release champions to the last 10 and you'll see the difference
Nimos Nimoos Sorry to say that... but one of the prime examples for a Champion that is completely counter intuitive to this concept is the rather new champ Yasuo. The Windwall for example reduces "the number of meaningful choices" that are available by a myriad.
ZodiakTeeVee Only it doesn't. It simply changes the choices. Do you wait for the wall to dissipate? Do you go through it into close quarters? Off to the side in order to shoot around it? And the right choice for those changes yet again depending on what champ you're playing. There is plenty of counterplay to it. And hell even Teemo shrooms have counterplay, albeit at a smaller level which makes sense as he is one of the original champions. Most of them have very little counterplay. Hence why no new champions have abilities like Taric's Point and Click stun.
Josiah Fincham It does. Especially in higher levels of play stuff like the Windwall doesn't only change the way you play but effectivly reduces the number of possibilities you have.
It's sheer existence give's you way less options to aproach a teamfight and doesn't add any significant new options.
It's true that this doesn't apply to most of the new champions since Riot has kinda learned it's "lesson". A new champ won't have that 700 range targetet poke (with an 0.9 ap scaling) that Zilean has.. but still. Old Champs exist and many of them are still a viable option even in competetive play.
ZodiakTeeVee I don't think you understand what I was saying at all. For one I don't recall saying anything about champion viability as this was a post on counterplay. Secondly you don't seem to grasp that windwall CHANGES your options as opposed to giving you no options. Hence there being counterplay which I already described in my previous comment. For instance when Taric or Sion or WW use their stuns or suppresses on you, there is no counterplay. There is no way to dodge the stuns. The only vague form of counterplay is to use Cleanse or an item that performs the same effect. However with windwall instead of removing all your options it changes them. Thus making you have to think of a better way to engage when he uses it. Even it's long cooldown is an example of counterplay as you have the option to try to bait it out, then go all in while it is cooling down.
HAHAH! Yes another positive on WOT! Thank you guys for bringing this stuff up!
WOT, and now World of Warships as well, are BRILLIANT designs! So much so that I have lost count on the money I have spent on these games!
Right now, World of Warships basically has 100% of my gaming attention! There is just SO MUCH fun in playing small, nearly undetectable destroyers with DEVASTATING torpedoes and just BLOWING a full health capitol Battleship right out of the water with one well aimed torpedo drop! And there is also ENDLESS fun in playing Cruisers of all types, NUKING destroyers and flooding battleships with deck fires as well as the occaisional torpedo if you are a fan of the Japanese Cruisers like me, or to a lesser extent the German ones as well! And then there is also ENDLESS fun in playing a Battleship, a TITAN so heavily armored and armed that it negates all but the strongest of enemy Battleship Armor Piercing ammunition, and again is a FULL COUNTER to a Cruiser player, one well placed salvo of shells, on a cruiser who has slipped up and shown too much of their side to a Battleship - and INSTANT GAME OVER!
I do not play Carriers, but they are a good design too, they are best against Battleships and other Carriers, decent against Cruisers and all but hopeless against Destroyers!
Anyway both World of Tanks and now World of Warships are VERY well balanced, perfect counter mechanic examples! And that combined with a constant progression through new tech trees of every class of vehicle (I do NOT play Artillery in World of Tanks, also Artillery is the most broken part of WOT, I love WOT, but sometime Artillery just ruins your days. It needs some additional balancing so that one handed monkeys cannot get lucky one-shots all day) - as well as constantly releasing new "Premium" vehicles which are well balanced with unique play styles, such as my 2 most recent purchases in World of Warships, the light cruiser USS Atlanta, and the Polish Destroyer ORP Blyskawica. Both ships offer quite unique styles of play, that would take a WALL of text to explain, but they are INCREDIBLY FUN!
So you have constantly progressing game play, by the tech trees, then you have Captain skills which can make a HUGE difference, so it REALLY pays to work up one captain using multiple premium ships of the same nation which said captain can sail with no penalty to skills, and build said captain up a certain way so that combined with your preferred play style, you can be INCREDIBLY strong and effective! Then you have compelling PREMIUM ships that are not just fun and rewarding to play, but also will train up captains AND earn you a TON of "credits" - the in-game currency, and all this leads to a SENSE OF OWNERSHIP!
And that is ONE mechanic that should NEVER be overlooked! In one of "The Game Theorists" episodes on DOTA 2 Vs LoL I argued for LoL because unlike Dota 2, LoL with its EARNED AND BOUGHT champions, as well as summoner level, runes and skills all lead to a VERY REAL SENSE OF OWNERSHIP! A mechanic I found to be TOTALLY LACKING in DOTA 2 with every single champion available immediately and permanently - as well as less PLAYER customization, such as the rune system, summoner level, and skill trees in LoL, DOTA 2 never got me!
I spent over 2 years addicted to LoL before I started my now FOUR year journey with World of Tanks! I STILL LOVE THE GAME! And while it is NOT PERFECT, it is pretty damned close IMHO! And World of Warships is even BETTER! Again, IMHO!
But yeah, Counter mechanics, and a SENSE OF OWNERSHIP of Digital material, that FEELS Tangible - that will STEAL my Money all day long!
Even my Brother, who actually has ADD, and it shows in the sheer AMOUNT of games he buys and plays, was addicted to LoL and WOT for almost a SOLID YEAR (Which for him is, literally, a record!) and once World of Warships came out, he was addicted for 3 months straight - and is likely to come back to it soon, as he has already put probably 120 hours into Fallout 4 since he bought it release day.
TL:DR
Perhaps if you have not yet done it, try an episode focused on the whole "Tangible sense of ownership" mechanic, as THAT keeps me paying and playing - along with fundamentally good core gameplay and progression!
I love how whenever League of Legends is brought up in a positive light, there's always a small crowd that jumps in and says "Nah, you guys are all wrong, LoL is a terrible game." and yet never really provides solid evidence of their claim.
This is also prevalent in table tob games as well. In heroclix there is a power called hyper sonic speed and it allows the character using it to ignore all characters in the and make a movement attack and move against. As a player being attacked with it there is almost no ways of defending against other than having a high range or amazing movement. The really only defense is hoping for a crit miss or player error.
this means no more stun mechanics, as they are not fun to play against.
*cough cough* overwatch *cough cough*
Nerd.
Way too many pictures of PILES of adorable kittens. I can't handle that much cuteness! Someone get me my emergency insulin! And more kitten pictures....
Magic the Gathering does this really well on a pretty regular basis. Just look at 3 recent cards: Voice of Resurgance, Chandra's Phoenix and Anger of the Gods.
Voice and Phoenix both don't just die for good, but instead leave their controller with an option to "revive" them or another creature on the board (which can be really powerful). Anger of the Gods circumvents this by not killing, but exiling those creatures, meaning they won't come back/leave anything behind.
Yet, Anger of the Gods is itself weak against stronger creatures, indestructable creatures, creatures with protection from red etc. so the cycle continues - brillant design !
Totally agree with you. Just Briliant! :D
probably for favorite episode yet. Its frustrating how few multiplayer games seem to consider this enough.
+rotom9199 even TF2 has things that often can simply drive you insane and you might dont find a good way of counterplay. There are some few, but dont give you the feeling that it is enough. The old backburner or the old dead ringer. Thankyfully valve seems to be very carefull about these things, so the games is not stuck with this lack of counterplay.
Really interesting concept! I can finally put a specific term on "balanced" game play mechanics. My main example is Splatoon--I've found that every weapon is carefully calibrated to be amazing in the right hands with the correct strategy. For example, Rollers are powerful but require stealth to use their 1hKO, and the more powerful the ink fling, the longer it takes to throw it. Or to fit with the video, Chargers have the "laser pointer" which both aids in aiming and makes it so they're not OP because they can't just snipe you out of the blue, unless of course they're really good and know how to hide the reticle properly. It's definitely why it's my favorite game: even when you get owned, you know that there's a way to beat them, no matter what your weapon is.
Overwatch handles this facet incredibly well
+CHUCKLZLORD just thought the same :D
Could you elaborate please? Not trying to be mean, just curious. :)
I'd say the top mechanic Overwatch has that does this well is letting you change heroes without penalty as often as needed to continue evolving the counterplay throughout a match. Not a lot of people take advantage of this, but I've found that if I die over and over with one hero, it's time to try a new angle of attack. Maybe I need to bulk up with D.Va, or our support is lacking, or maybe Widowmaker to take out enemies that are just destroying up close. The other stuff is how each hero is designed carefully so that no one hero is explicitly better than others. In a match of Widowmaker vs Soldier 76, Widow has the advantage, but D.Va using her skills can charge Widow and take her out up close or even just a Reinhardt can stop a Widowmaker from being effective. It's all about knowing each hero's strengths and weaknesses and then rebalancing your team to keep the game moving.
That's not counter play, though. That's counter picking. The two are very different.
Overwatch is a terrible example of counter play because between teams of equal skill the victor is usually decided by the characters picked before or during battle.
In Overwatch the person who counter PICKS well wins. If Overwatch was a good example of counter PLAY you wouldn't have to switch characters in the middle of battle, you could just out play them.
CrazyLikeUhFox I see your point, but I don't think it's totally accurate. Just because you change to a hero that has skills that better counter another doesn't mean you are skilled enough in that to also perform what's needed to successfully counter, like a Genji who isn't very good at reflecting a Bastion, or a Bastion who is good at not getting baited into the reflect. Skilled players can still work around a character's weakness.
Moving from Overwatch though, I can't think of an example off-hand, but don't most cases of counter-play require a retooling or restructuring of what you are playing fundamentally to deal with a new situation? Like swapping certain cards out of a deck that cover a weakness your opponent is going to exploit in your deck otherwise, or changing weapons in Dark Souls to something with an advantage of reach or speed.
I agree with this saying completely, and just want to add to that if you don't want to think about this in your game, make it single-player, there you will find other obstacles, but this one will be lifted
*cough* blue shell *cough*
Actually, you have a bunch of options to dodge it. They did a video on it in their level design series. One of the easier ones is slowing down to hit the second player, boosting when it hits, or preserving an item.
The thing that is most amazing to me about this episode is, growing up in a highly competitive environment counter play is an idea that seams so simple to me. Yet EC are pitching it like it's some new and amazing idea.
***** good point.
Good example of poor counterplay, Evolve. It's also why the game will lack longevity.
TheGreatRakatan and why does it have poor counter-play?
moute3 There is little to no counter play to the monster hiding which results in the hunters running around without any idea of where the monster is. There are also very limited things the hunters can be doing besides chasing the monster. This leads to boring and repetitive hunter gameplay in the lull time, broken up only by actually finding the monster.
Sound spikes, daisy, and dust tagging are great ways to find the monster along with corpses of wildlife, birds and broken bushes to find a sneaking monster. While the hunters hunt for the monster they can place traps in choke points and hunt elite wildlife for much needed perks, helping with downtime.
moute3 Sound spikes must be placed, meaning the first 3-4 minutes of a game are spent following Griffin around so that they can be useful. In a game where time is a precious resource for the hunters, this is very very bad. Following daisy means you are walking behind an AI. Following an AI is not fun, especially when Daisy will almost never catch up to the monster on her own. Dust tagging has a limited range and sizable cooldown. Once again this means the hunters are sitting hoping for something to happen to give them a target to chase. Hunting elite wildlife does not directly contribute to finding the monster and takes up that precious time that the monster is using to become huge. Corpses give little to no indication of how recently they were killed and heavy foliage is not sparse enough to separate the knocked over from the still standing, or give an indication of when the foliage was knocked over. In relatively small maps, knocked over foliage could be recent or it could have been there for 2 minutes.
Basically, the "counterplay" mechanics in Evolve involve waiting, which is boring. There are no actions that the hunters can take to directly affect the monster's play during the hunt, and by that same token, no reason for the monster to ever engage the hunters before level 3. At least in the Hunt gamemode. There are other gamemodes that encourage and even force engagements on a regular basis which is good, but there aren't enough and even then there are very limited options leading to repetitive gameplay.
+TheGreatRakatan The hunter's could use their ears to listen to monster's very loud steps or at the very least pay attention to monster's path-marks on the ground, if he left any.
However, yes there is a huge lack of counter-play in evolve.
And the main source of it - The Wraith. Hunters just can't counter his actions.
- The bastard can teleport away, but there is no way to prevent him from doing so, or at least to catch up.
- He can create a damage-dealing copy of himself, while turning invisible and run away, while copy engages the hunters and actually posses a threat to them due damage that it can deal. There is no way to counter act to this because nothing will help to find a real wraith: the copy will have all the target marks and high-lights while the only way to damage the real one - shoot into the air hoping that he's there somewhere.
- When he uses his "Nova ability" the only way for hunters to counter-act is to run and since monster is, obviously slighty more faster than hunters - this is not exactly a very effective tactic.
So yeah, Evolve definetly lacks counter-play where it really shouldn't.
That music at the end was the music Totalbiscuit uses for his Content Patch show. That isn't really important but I thought I'd share anyway.
TF2 is probably my favorite multiplayer game, which is why I hate admitting that it has one weapon that is awful for counter-play. The Gunslinger.
HA! The Stricky bomb launcher is 80 times worse then even the most annoying Mini sentry.
Minisentries are binary predictable and have bright flashing lights on their head. They are possibly deadly only when a engineer or his team is highly aggressive behind it. Pyros Demos and Soldiers carve though minisentries like they where air. Heavies usually plow through them and a clever scout can take them out with a quick meatshot in most cases. When up against good teams on good maps with a good combat engie I can see why it can be annoying, However on a spread even match up there is dozens of ways to take it down easily and shut down a engie. Really if you just kill the engie first minis are nothing more then slight speedbumps rather then an actual nest being a moderate speed bump.
The SL on the other hand is the most flexible weapon in tf2. It has great dps does 120 damage AVERAGE has a larger splash then the rocket laucher can be used for traps and are remote detonated. It also fires faster then the RL has the second fastest reload rate and the highest projectile clip size. They can't be air-blasted but they can be air-burst. They can be shot but only on the ground and it is literally 1/2 the size of the sandman ball's hit-box. There is no downside to using it as a RL at all. In fact many feel that it's arguibly better at the RL at everything the RL is good at (minus long distance) AND can do traps and other trickery easy.
Seriously if you think the Gunslinger is bad look at what the engie has to deal with constantly. He can spend over a minute setting up a normal nest only for it to fall to a -40 second charged uber. All his buildings do not get fall off calculated when they are hit. All of his "Counter classes" do over 50% damage each direct hit to his buildings. Engie was initially designed to be a great defenseive class that was hard to unroot when he was built up but now is a easy peasy pushover now that soldiers and demos can just hit 150 damage with penetration at a fire rate far faster then the wrench can possibly hope to match.
Ways I counter gunslinger minis. 1. Use a direct hit (or and decent rocket launcher, standerd works fine) 2. Spy (Spy will always counter sentrys not matter what) 3. Sniper (the sniper is probably the best for destroing mini sentrys as they can destroy them with ease at range)
Though much less popular, I also see this happen a lot in Enemy Territory, an objective-based shooter. The defenders on the high ground use snipers, and the attackers call in artillery to damage and scare away those snipers. Then the defenders get more medics to heal up their fired-upon teammates, and hold off the opponents in close combat. This causes ammo to be used up more rapidly, so some of the snipers and medics will switch to field ops, a class that can provide ammo. On and on it goes!
Nothing is more painfully ironic than when someone goes to League of Legends to show examples of good anything. It's one of the most poorly designed games out there.
yunikage It's just called playing video games, most people who think League has good design have League as the only game they've played in it's genre. You can play the worst fighting game too, but if it's the only one you have ever seen you're going to be impressed by some aspects.
Fran Madaraki
I wouldn't say it's the best, there's far worse *Cough Prime World Cough*. But with League and Dota as the leaders in the genre, both are pretty well designed for what they do. Argue how they seem balanced against each other, Dota has more depth while League is for faster 'funner' play.
Also this was made in 2012, when the balance of League is quite different than the balance of it now.
Fran Madaraki League could be better, true (graphics being one example). BUT if you deny its values, both in terms of gameplay and design, you're overlooking way too much. If you've played only a few matches in League and decided "Yeah, that's crap," you definitely haven't seen all. I'd urge you to try it again. If, in the end, it's not your game, just don't play it, no need to hate on it. I don't like DotA and HoN, but I'll never post something saying "DotA / HoN / Smite is crap." They're not, if there are people who enjoy them, awesome for them. The fact that I don't like them doesn't mean they're bad.
Happy New Year :)
Mario Krastanov I actually played League from beta for about 2-3 years (Up until Zed came out) and was generally around 1650 elo. I have more than enough experience with the game. League does the genre no justice once you experience other games in it (Namely Dota). The spells are uncreative and generally cookie cutter stuff while forcing in a cash shop and grind aspects that you need to do in order to play on a even playing field. That's great you'll never say a game is bad, but the world isn't a hug box. There is nothing GOOD about League, that isn't a copied/watered down version of something originally in coughDotacough.
Fran Madaraki I am well aware that DotA was the very first moba game, and one I spent a good deal of my time into btw :) but ultimately, I felt more drawn to LoL, and actually I can't really say why. By the time DotA 2 came out, I tried it, but it didn't really capture my attention. It was then that I saw Extra Credits' episode on Counter Play that I realised why I liked LoL: namely the option that targeted skill shots give, with their clear targeting reticules visible to both the player using the abilities and the players that they would be used on. That explains it for me, really, nothing more that that. It was frustrating for me otherwise to die from something I couldn't play against.
Glad you made this... I've been using this quite some time now, and I've always been telling people to keep it in mind when I get the chance. Now I can just refer them to this!
yu-gi-oh
and likely many other TCG
I'm currently working on some design documents as a part of my portfolio, this was very helpful for me, thank you!
And yet League of Legends is notoriously buggy and unbalanced... Somewhere between theory and execution something has gone horribly wrong.
Balance is a very hard thing not only to create, but also to see ^_^ Dota and LoL are both great examples of that (I have less experience with LoL, so I may be wrong about it). A lot of characters are called OP by new players, but after some time spent with a game and your understanding of the game grows, they stop to seem as OP as before or even visa-versa< under powered needing a buff. Still balance is never perfect and with each patch that will improve on some points, new problems will occure
Granted balancing can be difficult, but if your entire episode is based around balance, why choose a game that does a terrible job at it as a shining example? Riot is notorious for saying one thing and doing the complete opposite (whether by intention or accident). Also LOL, just like its predecessor DOTA, is unbalanced by design. Its what made DOTA popular. If a game is too balanced, too skill centric, then the average player doesn't stand a chance. In in both LOL and DOTA there is a large random factor, coupled with snowballing, small and otherwise insignificant events can completely and unalterably change the course of the game. This is by design, so that poorer/less skilled players will still win quite often. Granted over enough games (100's - 1000's) the skilled players will win more, but in any given game, the outcome is so close to 50:50 that skill might as not matter. This is why DOTA was more popular than normal WC3, the latter caters to skilled players while the former to unskilled. The one thing DOTA and hence LOL did so well was to show how lucrative it was to cater to the lowest common denominator. Balance, e-sports, just like tribunal, are just a PR stunt. Riot knows that if they were to actually balance the game, they'd lose most of their biggest paying customers. They aren't foolish enough to do that.
For some reason "50:50" became a link. I'm not sure why, and it was not intentional.
I'm quite sure that you have not played DotA/LoL long enough to understand how these games work. They (DotA especially imo) have very high learning curve and undoubtfully skillbased. WC3/Starcraft and DotA/LoL require different kind of skill, and shouldn't be compared (you don't compare CS to Street Fighter, do you?).
Ahh here it comes, the inevitable 'ad hominem' attacks. Despite knowing nothing about me, clearly I dislike league because I'm a bad player. There's clearly no other option... DOTA and LOL do not have a high learning curve; and they are not significantly difference, mechanics-wise, than WC3. Counter Strike and Street Fighter are completely different, DOTA/LOL is WC3 with AI controlled minions.
Would you argue that the sniper stream in Halo, as well as the scope glint in BF3 is a good example of counter play? It gives the chance for people on the receiving end of the bullet can find the sniper, and means that the sniper has to keep an eye out as they are not completely safe.
Surprised fighting games weren't mentioned more
Though ofc it's a 5 minute episode, and a good one at that; ty for bringing attention to this concept it's something i talk/think about a lot
Ever hear of the spinoff of shadowrun where it's a first person shooter? The best counter play i've ever played. They literally designed each spell with one countering it.
Five years later and it's safe to say, counter play is part of what absolutely defines balance in League of Legends. It has even moved into being something that is just part of normal League and even gaming lexicon. Really good job summing it up in the early days of the concept here though.
I'd love to see an update about this with a focus on CC and stun locking mechanic's in multiplayer games specifically, but single player too. (I far to often find far to many games that use these mechanic's in a way that limits skill and creates a very obvious dominant play style)
because, it's just like he says near the end-the counter play thing makes a game more enjoyable for the whole group, instead of a single player. The insanely competitive nature of most COD players leaves them only wanting to be #1-not just on the winning team, not even necessarily having the most fun, but purely for the status of 'the best'.
A beautiful example of counter play I had recently was going up against a Soldier-Medic combo who had the Beggar's Bazooka and a charged Kritzkrieg. Unable to take an alternate route to attack the Medic as a Scout, I used the Baby Face's Blaster and Bonk to make myself a lightning fast and briefly invincible target, then stayed right in the Soldier's face when he fired three rockets at point blank range, all of which exploded on me, but only ended up gibbing himself and spoiling their momentum.
Planetside 2. This has great counter play, with Scouts who fly and kill infiltrators and heavies who kill tanks, the engies who repair the tanks. Medics who bring the dead back to life, and the Max units who can kill any infantry. Not only are there limits to who can use what, when they can use it or where it should be used, but the dynamic is that if the game is played solo, you can still get somewhere with the skills that help both the player and the team (Medic's self heal helps everyone)
This concept is not only restricted to video games. My friends started a LARP group some number of years ago which inevitably dissolved. When they were writing in the abilities in the begining, or adding in a new game mechanic, they never considered what effect it would have on the players.
Defense of the Ancients was a custom Warcraft III map based on the custom Star Craft map Aeon of Strife. Even though AoS was the genre maker DotA was the genre codifier. Because DotA was the game that became popular all games that followed its structure were labeled as DotA clones, similar to how FPS games were called Doom clones. Because of this Riot Games coined the term Multiplayer Online Battle Arena as a marketing term in an attempt to differentiate itself thus giving a name to the genre.
One of the best examples of counter play is Dota 2. So many layers of it: vision, position, itemization, skill combinations lay way to endless mindgames and optimizing your own decisions. That's why you see the "metagame" shift constantly, because players always figure out new ways to deal with the opponents.
Oooh, one of my favorite OCRemix tracks in the closing. 😸
The original guild wars did this amazingly, many skills would put the decision in the enemies hands after the skill was cast, and the decision-making would pass from team to team every few seconds for amazing fast-paced teamfights - However this did make a huge learning curve (biggest i've ever played, even more than dota). Guild Wars was such a brilliant game with amazing teamplay and mechanics - such a shame they decided to abandon all the things that made it great when making gw2.
For a game with as little PVP as Vindictus has, it is is brilliant example of this. To do well in PVP, you need to have a basic understanding of the tactics that the opponent's class is based around using, as well as the skill to execute your own tactics and the quick thinking to adapt your strategy if it isn't working. There is also a reasonable amount of counter-play in the way you use your teammates in PVE battles. You can try to keep a nuker and tank formation, tag-team to deal damage when your buddy gets the aggro, or fight independently.
Thanks for this topic, guys. Counterplay makes games more fun for anyone who experiments with it. Feels topical to me. I got really pissed off the other day when a friend of mine duelled me in YuGiOh, with a deck made specifically to counter mine, that won in just a few turns... I'm sure there are options "out there" to deal with the strategy he was using, I just hadn't built them in and I ended up feeling there was nothing I could do. It was very frustrating.
Which is that everything is deadly and what you use depends on which weapon you like best and fits your play style. While some weapons have a better use in some situations,such situations are very hard to set up and maintain and you can either attack from another direction,use the same weapon for the same advantage,or using another weapon that might offer superior advantage in some way. Ergo,there's no "X counters Y" set up and it's all about how you want to play.
The Gastly Gibus! That is a great example of Counterplay!
Quite true, well said! And this was another very enjoyable and interesting episode.
I guess it's cool how you mention counter play after talking to the LoL guy. It's also pretty cool how DotA has been doing the same thing for years... and years... and years...and years before LoL was even being made.
On a non dota/lol hate related buisness, the effects on mechanics for both teams is a good point and needs to be paid attention too, but you also should mention about how your abilities and mechanics affect your ALLIES.
I think a good game for counter play is the new Star Wars Battlefront. Being able to get in a fighter and rain down aerial support is fun for the person doing it, but it's also really cool for the people on the ground to see. It also comes into play with power ups like being able to play as a jedi. The jedi is having a blast being a jedi while the other team's players feel really good when they finally beat him; it's like beating a boss. This also comes in the walker assault mode where the rebels are at a clear disadvantage, but the sheer possibility of defeating such a difficult enemy is gratifying. It's one of those things that makes you jump out of your seat and yell "YES!" when it happens. Battlefront creates counter play by making certain "bad" things immersive and visually striking or by giving you a sense of gratification by defeating something naturally stronger than you.
Another good,but odd example of this is the Huntsman in tf2, it may seem like a small thing,but it opens up a large range of tactics. For example, is an enemy sniper is using the huntsman, he can get headshots at close range and have a good mid range fire as well,and a pyro facing the huntsman can reflect the arrows back at his teamates, and it even opens up choices on the snipers team,as a friendly pyro can light his arrow and use the fire damage against,lets say, an over-healed heavy.
Take it from someone who has played competitive cod4 promod for years and fps's for many more. The game IS competitive, it IS addictive, and (sans the recent titles) it has fair counterplay.
Just because CoD is hated by a lot of people, doesn't mean you have to hate it.
These videos are fascinating and give me a lot to think about. Thank you.
Extra Games FPS Weapon #001: Flower Wrench:
If you get hit with the Flower Wrench, you get a flower on your head.
That saps your HP, becoming a health pickup on your death, but it also makes you faster, and if you hit someone while under the effect, it knocks them back more and gives the effect to them. The effect can only be removed with death or Tinselwrapped weapons. Friendly fire is recommended.
This is actually a more complete explanation of something I've attempted to explain to my girlfriend, who loves video games and talks to me about them a lot.
The conversation usually starts with, "Wouldn't it be awesome if x, y, z?", and eventually she ends up piling on a laundry list of things that would be awesome if an individual character could do vs. other characters.
In the past, my response has been, "you can't make everything too awesome or nobody could do anything to counter it."
This sounds like a very interesting concept.
I've experienced many times when anotehr player is able to completely decimate what I throw at them because of some special item or weapon they have.
WOW was notorious for this. If you came across someone with a high-level weapon and you didn't have it, you were screwed.
This is a great video for even just product development and not just games.
In Yu-Gi-Oh!, missing the timing is a mechanic that limits the number of situations an effect can be activated, and also give opponents ways to play against the effect (making something miss the timing) in several ways (see Card Rulings: Geartown for example). The worst part is that missing the timing is overcomplicated, and even wording of card texts ("then" and "also, after that") are relevant to missing the timing.
Other simpler rules changes that make the gamer simpler and create counterplay are new SEGOC (easier to dodge negation) and the removal of Ignition Effect Priority (able to deny activation of Ignition Effects).
I love you guys. Dont know how I didnt know about this channel
As always, excellent and well-worded analysis.
That is interesting. That is probably why elemental paper-rock-scissors works so well. It is so much fun to figure that out and apply it. If an opponent tries to use a certain element against you, it is fun to choose an element on your team to counter it. It is in Pokemon. For example I had a tricky time tying to fight against a Decidueye. It is mainly a grass type. However it gets a bit more complicated with dual types and attack types.A great way to counter a grass Pokemon is to kill it with fire. It is tricky when my fire type Pokemon, Inceneroar, is too weakened to fight and it is the only decent counter to Decidueye on my team. I eventually won the battle, even though it was tough. It was so much fun.
When I try designing my own game, I did think of conterplay without really realizing the issues. I still have a elemental paper-rock-sizzors. My parallel to grass is the wood element. One can still kill it with fire. One can also choose to kill it with ice, poison, metal, dark or cosmic. I also have classes in my game. I was wondered how those can be countered, even though they lack a paper-rock-sizors relationship. I figured that one can use the opposite class. Then they can use attacks to cancel out the effects in the opponent. For example hunter is a class the Decidueye resembles. In my game hunter is the speedy class. It excels at depleting their enemy's energy and make them unable to fight back. The opposite of this is the warrior. It has good endurance and it can replenish its energy. The warrior can counter a hunter, because it can replenish the energy the hunter depleted. Using opposite classes is something I would do to counter the class of the opponent. Using the same class is another strategy that could work. If the class depletes health or energy, it would be a race to the bottom. If the class replenishes health or energy, it would be a battle of attrition. I wonder what if I got an opponent that was a wood hunter. A good counter is a fire warrior. It can nullify the attacks and press advantage. A fire hunter could also work. It can deplete the energy of a wood warrior quickly. There are many more options. One can use a metal warrior or a poison hunter for example. I would like to use an ice warrior. When I first tested my game, I like to pick electric and earth as my elements. I then found ice to be very helpful for my team, because it contributed the best element coverage to add to the other two elements.
The first thing I thought of when I heard LoL an the concept of counter play was wish they thought of that when Darius was in development, but then I realized some of my favorite moments were when I picked Kayle against him (or anyone who can dodge it) So I guess LoL really is good about doing this.
This is pretty cool to see, since this is a lot older than the Riot stuff I've seen lately. Riot is really good at setting up the counterplay stuff. Sometimes they go overboard and give more counterplay than actual play (Sona rework lmao) BUT they still set up a lot of really good stuff for the most part.
They ALWAYS mention counterplay on their patch notes too, so they're not very tight lipped about this; in fact, they're so open about it that you can tell what they're thinking every time they make a patch or add a character, etc. They describe what they're thinking of doing the whole way through and that's pretty badass.
MrServantRider Except for Vi and Poppy though.
No, new Fiora is much, MUCH better than old Fiora.
Point and click =/= no counterplay. This kind of mentality is making Riot turn stuff into skillshots. It's not smart. It's okay for champions to have guaranteed damage or CC.
You're confusing having tools to outplay you with having a toxic kit. The only part of Fiora's new kit that could be considered "toxic" is her % true damage. You can outplay her now.
ArvelDreth Yes, you can? Dude, she went freakin' untreatable before for like 2.5 seconds. Just because now she gets to parry incoming stuff for .75 does not make her op. It requires great predicting/reaction from her and even then, if she blocked that stuff that means she's far enough (no way she's going to react an Ashe arrow point-blank unless she really deserves it) that you can get away from her; her dash isn't that long.
You talk about her W as if it was some sort of unfair skill or something, and it's not. If you consider "building thornmail/two hundred armor" fun counterplay then good for you, but old Fiora was both toxic and unviable.
You're assuming that she is ulting you ALONE nearby your tower. That is a single case of her ult and does not make the ability properly counterable. You can still counter her new ult moving around. Hell she is TELLING YOU where she's going to strike.
Also lol @ complaining about Fiora's magic damage xd.
I taught the counter to Sollys were Demomans and Pyros and the counter to a heavy medic is a combination of classes. I can imagine a sniper being very useful to counter that one.
What are perks like flak jacket and ghost then? They're counter play to the uav and explosives, both of which you can gain easier access to in the game through certain perks.
Has that gotten better?
I played extensively in the era of Red and Blue, but I never had a satisfying battle against a human.
They are either status battles, where someone's sleep inducing pokemon is faster and luckier than the other person's, or they are raw powerfests, where the player who has a level advantage steamrolls the other.
There's kind of an example of this in Halo 4. One of the specializations allows you to know which player just killed you, and paints them on the map, so you can go get revenge if you want.
Animal having an arm race is great examples of counter play. Arm races can be symmetric where one tree tries to grow taller then another, which probably isn't counter play. But asymmetric arm races where a tree make poisonous leaves til kill insects, which develop resistance. Zebras learn to duck in response to ancestral humans lasso hunting. Gazelles stotting to avoid being eaten. Bats evolving extreme immune system to fend off parasites. etc.
Frequency dependent selection is also counter play. The mathematical field called game theory is also all about counter play.